Odyssey Corpn. (531996)
Score breakdown: P/E: 0/3 · ROCE: 0/2 · Growth: 2/2 · Dividend: 0/1
Key Financials
| Current Price | ₹11 |
| Market Cap | ₹82.55 Cr |
| P/E Ratio | 42.03 |
| ROCE | 3.76% |
| ROE | 5.22% |
| Dividend Yield | 0% |
| Profit Growth | 525% |
| Debt/Equity | — |
| Sales Growth | -43.11% |
| 52-Week Range | ₹5.45 — ₹11 |
| Sector | Finance |
| Book Value | ₹7 |
AI Analysis
AI-generated, general educational analysis — not personal investment advice.
Let's look at Odyssey Corpn. A ₹83 crore NBFC trading at ₹11, near its 52-week high. On the surface, a P/E of 42 looks rich, but a 525% profit growth suggests a low base effect. The latest quarter shows ₹8 crore sales and ₹2 crore net profit — annualize that and the stock might appear cheaper. But don't be fooled. Sales are down 43% year-on-year. This is not a growing business; it's a shrinking one with a sudden earnings rebound. ROE is a mere 5.22%, ROCE 3.76%, and there's no dividend. As Graham would say, book value is ₹7, so you're paying 1.57 times book for a business with subpar returns. The Piotroski score of 6 is acceptable, but that doesn't make a good investment. The PEG of 0.08 looks attractive only if this profit growth is sustainable — and I have serious doubts. A 43% revenue collapse with a profit surge usually means cost-cutting, not fundamental strength. In an NBFC, the real assets are the loan book and its quality, but we have no data on NPAs, and debt/equity is marked N/A. That's a red flag. Promoter holding is also missing, so governance transparency is unclear. This smells like a turnaround in its early innings, but the underlying economics are poor. I'd need years of consistent earnings, a clean loan book, and honest management before I'd consider even a small position. For now, I'll watch from the sidelines and wait for the business to prove itself.
The full AI analysis, bull and bear case and key monitorables are in FairStock Pro.
Data from BSE/NSE filings. AI analysis is for educational purposes only — not investment advice. Scoring methodology · Disclaimer