Prozone Realty (PROZONER)

Turnaround

FairStock Score: 21/100 — RISKY

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

Key Financials

Current Price₹42.02
Market Cap₹641.24 Cr
P/E Ratio60.03
ROCE2.83%
ROE2.82%
Dividend Yield0%
Profit Growth123.75%
Debt/Equity1.35
Sales Growth-0.5%
Promoter Holding53.56%
52-Week Range₹39.31 — ₹72.77
SectorRealty
Book Value₹30.17

Strengths

Concerns

AI Analysis

When I look at Prozone Realty, I see a business that fails my first test: it does not earn a good return on capital. The price is ₹62.45, the market cap is ₹758 Cr, and book value is ₹50.77, so I am paying 1.23 times net worth. That would be acceptable only if the company had a strong, durable moat. Instead, ROE is 0.19% and ROCE is just 2.83%. This is a capital-hungry real estate developer, not a franchise with pricing power. The latest quarter shows sales of ₹58 Cr and net profit of ₹7 Cr, and sales growth of 29.83% sounds encouraging. Profit growth of 123.75% also catches the eye, but that is from a tiny, likely loss-making base. P/E is quoted as 0.00, which tells me the trailing earnings picture is unreliable. The Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 is a bright spot, suggesting the balance sheet is improving, and debt-to-equity of 0.54 is manageable. Promoter holding of 53.56% is healthy, but ownership alone does not create a moat. There is zero dividend yield, so investors need capital gains, and with only a 2.83% return on capital, the business is not compounding shareholder wealth. I would not call this a wonderful business at a fair price; it is a modest book value story with some operating momentum. At 1.23 times book, the margin of safety is thin unless the company can consistently convert its real estate assets into cash and drive returns higher. I prefer certainty. This is a turnaround situation, not a stalwart. I would wait for a lower price or a proven track record of higher returns before acting.

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