Godfrey Phillips (GODFRYPHLP)

Fast Grower

FairStock Score: 63/100 — STEADY

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

Key Financials

Current Price₹2,149
Market Cap₹33,520.48 Cr
P/E Ratio24.51
ROCE26.32%
ROE24.48%
Dividend Yield2.33%
Profit Growth-51.4%
Debt/Equity0.04
Sales Growth98.84%
Free Cash Flow₹509 Cr
Promoter Holding72.58%
52-Week Range₹1,642 — ₹3,224
SectorCigarettes & Tobacco Products
Book Value₹398.29

AI Analysis

AI-generated, general educational analysis — not personal investment advice.

I wear two hats: Buffett for quality, Graham for price. Godfrey Phillips shows quality: ROE 24.48%, ROCE 26.32%, debt/equity only 0.04, FCF ₹509 Cr, and Altman Z-Score 5.08. That combination suggests a durable moat—high returns on capital without debt—and Piotroski F-Score 7/9 supports financial health. Promoter holding of 72.58% is strong skin in the game, while dividend yield of 2.33% pays you to wait. But growth is messy: sales growth of 98.84% is spectacular, yet profit growth is -51.40%, so the top line surge is not reaching the bottom line. Latest quarter sales were ₹1,829 Cr and net profit ₹343 Cr, which implies a healthy quarterly margin, but the annual profit decline needs explanation. Five-year revenue CAGR of 14.29% is respectable, but PEG 1.57 and EV/EBITDA 33.45 show the market already pays for it. At ₹2,149, P/E is 24.51 and P/B is 5.40 against book value of ₹398.29, so asset protection is thin. The 52-week range is ₹1,770.00 to ₹3,467.70. Graham Number is ₹789.15, giving a margin of safety of -168.06%; DCF intrinsic value is ₹536.27. That is not a bargain; it is a quality business priced for optimism. FairStock score of 63/100, STEADY, fits a mature stalwart. For an Indian retail investor, this is a wonderful business to study, but not to buy without a much larger margin of safety.

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