StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
TPET$0.40+9.89%
Fair $0.40+0.0%

TPET

Trio Petroleum Corp.

Energy / Oil & Gas E&PNYSE American

$0.40

+0.04 (+9.89%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $0.40Fund rank 29/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 10/F
F-Score: 5/9
Low Profitability

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 33% · confianza 23%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $-4.4M · quality 66.0/100

Data gap 29/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 30/100Data 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

10/100

F

Piotroski

5/9

balance/quality

Valuation

50/100

+0.0% upside

5Y CAGR

+0.0%

50/100

Data QA

16/100

SEC 0%

Latest source: unknownPeriods: 4Warnings: 1unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Sector-specific commodity mid-cycle model required: targets are disabled until normalized cycle price/cost-curve/reserve data exists. ROE is -64.4%, below the 5% threshold
Thesis & Journal · TPETLocal privado en este navegador · Trio Petroleum Corp.
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

$14M

P/E

N/A

•

EV/EBITDA

N/A

•

ROE

-64.4%

↓

Gross Margin

55.9%

↑

Debt/Equity

0.04

↓
52-Week Range$0
$0$3

TradingView lightweight chart

TPET price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $0.400Periodo -99.1%
Fair value: $0.400

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

—

FCF CAGR

—

FCF margin

-874.2%

FCF / Net income

0.48x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $398734.0 · net income $-7.3M · FCF $-3.5M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

55.9%— pts

Operating margin

-1322.2%— pts

Net margin

-1826.3%— pts

FCF margin

-874.2%— pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$398734.00$398734.00$213204.00——
Net Income$-7.3M$-7.3M$-9.6M$-6.5M$-3.8M
EBITDA$-6.7M$-6.7M$-7.5M$-5.8M$-2.1M
EPS-0.80-0.80-4.32-5.67-3.29
Gross Margin55.9%55.9%100.0%——
Operating Margin-1322.2%-1322.2%-2916.3%——
Net Margin-1826.3%-1826.3%-4515.3%——
Balance Sheet
Debt/Equity0.040.040.100.121.99
Current Ratio0.500.50———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$-3.5M$-3.5M$-5.0M$-4.4M$-502144.00
Returns
ROE-64.4%-64.4%-106.5%-67.2%-139.6%
Valuation
P/B0.320.320.610.98—
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth87.0%87.0%———
EPS Growth81.5%81.5%23.8%-72.3%—

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 · 1Y approxreconcilia total -63.0%

Total return

-63.0%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

-4.32 → -0.80

Residual

-63.0%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+0.0%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term-63.0%

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.