John Cockerill (500147)

FairStock Score: 34/100 — RISKY

Score breakdown: P/E: 0/3 · ROCE: 1/2 · Growth: 2/2 · Dividend: 0/1

Key Financials

Strengths

• Sales growth of 41.10% shows strong demand traction.
• Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 indicates improving financial health and operational quality.
• ROCE of 12.25% suggests the core business generates a reasonable operating return on capital.
• PEG of 0.27 implies the market is pricing in continued high growth, at least on paper.

Concerns

• P/E of 123.67 and P/B of 13.42 are extreme relative to ROE of only 5.13%.
• Latest quarter net profit is ₹0 Cr on ₹102 Cr sales, showing weak earnings durability.
• Dividend yield of 0.14% offers almost no downside support for investors.
• FairStock Score of 34/100 flags the stock as risky; debt/equity and promoter holding data are unavailable.

AI Analysis

Whenever I examine a stock, I ask: what durable advantage does this business have, and what am I paying for that advantage? At John Cockerill, I find no obvious moat, and I am being asked to pay a great deal. The stock trades at ₹5,760.95, which works out to a P/E of 123.67 and a price-to-book of 13.42. Yet the return on equity is only 5.13%. In other words, I would be paying over thirteen times book for a business that generates modest returns on that book. That is not value investing; it is hope. The reported numbers contain flashes of promise. Sales grew 41.10%, and profit grew 880.95%. The Piotroski F-score of 7/9 suggests recent financial health has improved. A PEG ratio of 0.27 would indicate the market is pricing in continued fast growth. But a value investor should be suspicious when profit growth is measured in triple digits; it often starts from a very depressed base. The latest quarter reminds us of that fragility: sales were only ₹102 Cr, and net profit was ₹0 Cr. There was no profit in the quarter. For a company with a market capitalisation of ₹2,881 Cr, that is a serious quality gap. The dividend yield is negligible at 0.14%, so I cannot wait and get paid while I am right. My return would depend entirely on someone else paying a higher price. The FairStock score of 34/100 labels this risky, and I agree. This is a cyclical industrial business, not a predictable compounding machine. Without debt/equity data and with promoter holding unavailable, I cannot fully judge the balance sheet or management skin in the game. I will not chase it at this price. I would need a far lower valuation, a stronger and steady ROE, and evidence that the quarterly zero-profit quarter is the exception, not the rule. Until then, this is a company I watch, not one I own.

Data from BSE/NSE filings. AI analysis is for educational purposes only — not investment advice. Scoring methodology · Disclaimer