CEAT (CEATLTD)

Stalwart

FairStock Score: 61/100 — STEADY

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

Key Financials

Current Price₹3,688.8
Market Cap₹14,921.23 Cr
P/E Ratio25.25
ROCE15.4%
ROE12.67%
Dividend Yield0.95%
Profit Growth-27.6%
Debt/Equity0.65
Sales Growth18%
Free Cash Flow₹170 Cr
Promoter Holding47.21%
52-Week Range₹3,061.25 — ₹4,438
SectorAuto Components
Book Value₹1,454.52

Strengths

Concerns

AI Analysis

Let me look at CEAT as a business first. It is an established tyre maker with a promoter holding of 47.21%, so owner interests are reasonably aligned. Over five years revenue has compounded at 11.68%, and the latest quarter shows sales of ₹4,157 Cr, so the franchise has a growth engine. Profit growth is 14.94%, while return on equity is 12.67% and return on capital employed is 15.40%. Those are respectable, though not extraordinary. The balance sheet is conservative: debt-to-equity is 0.68, and the Piotroski score of 8/9 plus Altman Z of 3.02 suggest financial distress is not a near-term worry. Free cash flow, however, is only ₹170 Cr, which is thin against the market cap of ₹14,285 Cr and even the quarterly profit of ₹155 Cr. That makes me question earnings quality. Now comes the hard part: valuation. At ₹3,706.60, the P/E is 22.93, price-to-book is 3.43 against a book value of ₹1,079.98, and EV/EBITDA is 88.75. Graham’s number is ₹1,822.63 and the DCF value is ₹2,243.56 — both far below the current price. There is no margin of safety; in fact, it is deeply negative at -93.75%. The dividend yield of 0.85% offers little comfort. I do not deny the business quality; the FairStock score of 61 calls it steady. But a good business can be a poor investment at the wrong price. At this valuation, CEAT is a fine company selling above my assessment of worth. I would wait for either a material pullback or several years of earnings growth to catch up before committing capital.

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