Avadh Sugar (AVADHSUGAR)

Cyclical

FairStock Score: 55/100 — STEADY

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

Key Financials

Current Price₹653.15
Market Cap₹1,307.5 Cr
P/E Ratio19.84
ROCE9.19%
ROE6.9%
Dividend Yield1.53%
Profit Growth102.73%
Debt/Equity1.25
Sales Growth8.7%
Promoter Holding60.39%
52-Week Range₹306.05 — ₹885
SectorAgricultural Food & other Products
Book Value₹561.71

Strengths

Concerns

AI Analysis

At ₹474.60, Avadh Sugar sells at a discount to its book value of ₹544.27 — a price-to-book of 0.87 — and a P/E of 9.91. On the surface, that looks like the sort of bargain Graham would investigate. But I must ask: is this a wonderful business at a fair price, or a mediocre business at a cheap price? The numbers say the latter. Return on equity is just 6.90%, and ROCE is 9.19%. That is not a business with economic magic; sugar is a commodity, government-influenced, with limited pricing power. The 175.67% profit growth sounds spectacular, but it comes on top of sales growth of only 3.46%. The latest quarter earned ₹17 crore on ₹638 crore of sales — a margin under 3%. That tells me the earnings surge is cyclical, not structural. The PEG of 0.11 is meaningless when the 'G' is a recovery from a low base. What I like: the balance sheet is not reckless — debt/equity is 0.56 — and the Piotroski F-score of 7/9 suggests recent fundamentals are improving. Promoter holding of 60.39% aligns owners with shareholders, and a 2.68% dividend yield gives me some reward while I wait. Still, a price below book in a cyclical sugar business can be a value trap if low returns persist. Graham would want a margin of safety, and at this price he'd find some — but not a great one. I'd need to see consistent ROE improvement and proof that the profit jump is not just sugar-price luck. This is a cyclical stock, not a stalwart. It deserves only a small allocation, and it must be monitored closely.

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