StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
TLIH$4.11+8.99%
Fair $4.11+0.0%

TLIH

Ten-League International Holdings Limited

Industrials / Industrial DistributionNasdaqCM

$4.11

+0.34 (+8.99%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $4.11Fund rank 19/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 39/D
F-Score: 7/9

FCF base 3Y

n/d

n/d CAGR · yield n/d

FCF base 5Y

n/d

n/d base · n/d expected

Precio de entrada

n/d

MOS 34% · confianza 14%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $-7.8M · quality 25.7/100

Data gap 19/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 3/100Data QA 20/100

Ranking barato/determinista: CAGR esperado 5Y + downside bear + calidad del modelo + balance + capital allocation + data gate. No entra en buy-candidate si la data es débil o el CAGR 5Y no compensa.

Quality + valuation scorecard

SA Score

39/100

D

Piotroski

7/9

balance/quality

Valuation

50/100

+0.0% upside

5Y CAGR

+0.0%

50/100

Data QA

16/100

SEC 0%

Latest source: unknownPeriods: 4Warnings: 0unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Sector-specific holding-company NAV/SOTP model required: targets are disabled until look-through holdings, debt and discount data exists.
Thesis & Journal · TLIHLocal privado en este navegador · Ten-League International Holdings Limited
Plantilla tipo buy-side: tesis, bull/base/bear, catalizadores, riesgos, kill criteria y fecha de revisión. Esto no gasta GPT-5.5; luego lo usamos como contexto del memo.

Sin guardar todavía.

Market Cap

$12M

P/E

2.6x

↓

EV/EBITDA

2.3x

↓

ROE

33.5%

↑

Gross Margin

24.4%

↓

Debt/Equity

1.86

↑
52-Week Range$4
$2$70

TradingView lightweight chart

TLIH price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $4.109Periodo -89.0%
Fair value: $4.109

Price & Ratios

Absolute Values (Left Axis)

Ratios / Percentages (Right Axis)

Financial statement dashboard

Crecimiento, márgenes y provenance

2022–2025 · 3 años de histórico normalizado

Revenue CAGR

+0.8%

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

11.9%

FCF / Net income

1.62x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $76.2M · net income $5.6M · FCF $9.0M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

24.4%+4.7% pts

Operating margin

10.2%+0.9% pts

Net margin

7.3%+0.6% pts

FCF margin

11.9%+24.6% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$76.2M$76.2M$58.5M$72.8M$74.5M
Net Income$5.6M$5.6M$1.9M$7.1M$5.0M
EBITDA$13.9M$13.9M$8.7M$13.1M$9.7M
EPS——0.702.501.68
Gross Margin24.4%24.4%18.2%21.7%19.8%
Operating Margin10.2%10.2%5.8%12.1%9.2%
Net Margin7.3%7.3%3.2%9.7%6.7%
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity1.861.866.057.568.26
Current Ratio0.870.87———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$9.0M$9.0M$-7.8M$-18.2M$-9.5M
Returns
ROE33.5%33.5%30.3%163.4%153.5%
Valuation
P/E2.632.63———
EV/EBITDA2.342.34———
P/B0.720.72———
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth30.2%30.2%-19.6%-2.3%—
EPS Growth——-72.0%49.2%—

Revenue, Net Income & Free Cash Flow ($B)

Margins (%)

Returns (%)

Leverage & Liquidity

Reverse DCF · market-implied EPS growthterminal P/E 15.0x · COE 10.0%
Reverse DCF requires positive EPS; loss-making or zero-EPS companies cannot produce a clean EPS hurdle.

Qué te dice: cuánto EPS CAGR está descontando el precio si sales al múltiplo terminal indicado. Si el growth observado queda por debajo, el mercado está pidiendo una ejecución muy fina.

Return attribution · available periodreconcilia total -89.0%

Total return

-89.0%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

0.70 → n/d

Residual

-89.0%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+0.0%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-89.0%

EPS/multiple decomposition requires positive EPS at both endpoints; residual absorbs price move not explained by dividends.

Simple additive decomposition: total return = EPS growth contribution + P/E multiple contribution + dividend contribution + explicit residual. The residual captures cross-terms, buybacks/share-count effects, FX, special dividends, data noise and methodology mismatch so the bridge always reconciles.