← All companiesBy market cap
✕NegativeTier 1

Aeroflex Enterprises LtdNSE:AEROENTER

Diversified · ₹1,277 Cr market cap · covered for 1 quarter since Q4 2026

Current view Q4 2026

Not a real operating business but a holding company that buys firms and sells them for one-off gains. Profits are lumpy, 'startup portfolio' claims look promotional, disclosure weak. Best avoided.

Latest exchange filings last 5 · 5 after Q4 2026

Exchange filings, with the company's own one-line summary, read off the same page as the figures. Screener publishes only the most recent few, so this is the last 5 — not everything filed since your note, and a quiet-looking list is not proof of a quiet quarter. A filing is marked new when it is dated after the end of the quarter your note covers. Not scored, and not a judgement — a routine repayment notice and a takeover sit in the same list.

AI concall report · Q4 2026

The full earnings-call read behind this view — what management promised, what they delivered, and the earning trigger.

✨ Read the report ↗

Growth Q4 2026

Metric This year vs lastYoY · vs Q4 2025 vs the quarter beforeQoQ, sequential · vs Q3 2026 3-year yearly average3Y CAGR · compounded 5-year yearly average5Y CAGR · compounded
Sales▲ +24.2%+4.7%+14.4%+27.7%
Operating profit▲ +33.3%−5.3%+27.1%+42.0%
EPS▲ +116.3%+49.3%+14.5%+48.8%
PAT▲ +36.8%+4.0%——

Tinted rows drive the Tier. Tier = the weaker of YoY Sales and YoY PAT growth. Here the weaker is Sales at +24.2%, which is ≥ 20% → Tier 1.

QoQ is sequential, not a trend. For most Indian companies the March quarter is seasonally the largest, so a June-quarter fall against it is a calendar effect. Only the YoY column feeds the Tier.

Multibagger potential Average64/100

Growing, but too slowly to re-price. Profit per share grew 14.5% a year. A big re-pricing usually needs more than 15% a year, so the score is capped no matter how cheap it looks.

Doubling needs a price-tag it has reached before

₹122 → ₹243 needs the P/E at 29× — it is 21× today, and has ranged 4.3× to 409× over the last 5 years. The rest would come from earnings growing as they have.

If this keeps up for 3 more years ×1.3 +30% — profit growing 15% a year, and buyers paying 19× for it again

What you pay for its profitlog scale · 5-year range

4.3×5-year low 21×today 29×to double 43×to triple 95×usual level 409×5-year high

Tripling needs 43× — inside its 5-year range, under the 95× median.

The Treadmillearnings climbing while the price-tag on them has not — no re-rating yet⚠ inflection⚠ low growth
Is it cheap right now?P/E 21× is 1.16× its own 5-year average of 19× — about level with it; forward PEG 1.29 — dear for its growth 11/25
Has the market paid for this growth yet?ΔMultiple ×0.93 a year (×0.79 over 3 years) — slight de-rate 10/15
Is the growth real, or flattered?EPS fully backed by sales; QoQ holding 30/30
What does it earn on its own money?earns only 8% on its own book 0/10
Is the price trend agreeing?above 40W, below the shorter EMAs 13/20
Price vs its book value 1.7×P/B — ₹73 of book value per share
Price vs next year’s profit 19×forward P/E — what an entry pays now
Price over the last year ×1.06earnings ×1.15, price-tag ×0.93

Unpaid, but the growth quality is thin. Verify before acting.

How this is calculated

This is arithmetic, not a forecast — Return = ΔEPS × ΔMultiple. It says what would have to be true, not how likely it is, and "earnings keep growing at this rate for three more years" is the assumption doing the most work. This is a small-cap at ₹1,277 cr, so the odds of a re-rate are not fighting its own size.

Band capped: growth of 14.5% is below the 15% bar a re-rate needs.

Growth rate used: 14.5% — the weakest of EPS / Sales / Op-profit from 3-year EPS CAGR. Latest quarter reads 60%.

How it compares with its rivals Diversified · 6 of 87 listed

These are the industry's largest names rather than companies of its own size, so the columns are worth reading straight across — a ranking against them would only be restating the size gap.

Company PriceP/ESizeROCE Profitlast qtr Saleslast qtr
Aeroflex Enter. ₹124 9.2× ₹1,407 Cr 12.6% +854.2% +40.5%
Welspun Corp ₹2,598 29.7× ₹68,521 Cr 22.9% +198.6% +14.9%
APL Apollo Tubes ₹2,197 49.6× ₹60,990 Cr 31.8% +10.9% +8.4%
Shyam Metalics ₹1,092 27.2× ₹30,481 Cr 13.0% +18.1% +23.4%
Ratnamani Metals ₹2,792 44.6× ₹19,566 Cr 17.9% −37.7% −15.6%
Jindal Saw ₹293 28.7× ₹18,706 Cr 10.4% −75.4% +9.0%

Screener's own peer group, from the request already made for the industry P/E. It serves the industry's largest names by market cap, not companies of a similar size, so treat this as context rather than a like-for-like table; this company is always shown. On a phone the price, size and sales columns are dropped rather than pushed off the edge. Not part of the score.

Business quality to Jun 2026

Are the margins widening? no — margins have been squeezed operating margin 16% → 9% over 3 years
Did the profit turn into cash? very little of it arrived as cash 38% last year, -52% over three · free cash flow −₹60 cr, positive in 0 of 5 years
Is the growth borrowed? essentially debt-free ₹41 cr — 0.05× its own equity (was 0.04×)
Is it being collected? collection is steady 112 days to collect, down 8 in a year · cash cycle 166 days
Who has been buying? the promoters have held steady promoters 52.3% (+0.7 in a year), 51.6% → 52.3% over 2.8 years · FIIs 1.3% (+0.8) · DIIs 0.1% · shareholders 16,588 → 36,992
What does it earn on its capital? earns a fair return on its capital ROCE 12.6% · ROE 8.4%

Fetched from the filings, not typed — and deliberately not part of the score. These are the questions the score cannot ask: it reads growth, price and trend, so a company can score well while its profit never becomes cash. Weigh these beside the note, not against the number.

Screener's own checklist not mine, not the score

In its favour

  • Company is almost debt free.
  • Company is expected to give good quarter

Against it

  • Company has a low return on equity of 9.15% over last 3 years.
  • Earnings include an other income of Rs.163 Cr.

Generated by screener.in from a fixed checklist — not written by me and not an input to the score. It is here as a second machine opinion to weigh against the note; where it disagrees with the view above, the note is the considered one.