GMRP&UI
GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited
Powerโ€บPower Generation
Current Priceโ‚น93.54(-1.45%)
Market Capโ‚น7,306 Cr
Analysis WindowQ1 FY27
Last Updated28 Oct 2026
Flagium AI Risk Score
Risk Score measures the severity of detected structural financial risks using Flagium's quantitative risk framework. A lower score indicates fewer or less severe detected risks (0 = Minimal Risk, 100 = Severe Risk). Quarter-to-quarter changes reflect changes in the underlying risk signals, not investment recommendations.
30/ 100
Scale: 0 = Clean โ€ข 100 = Severe Risk (Lower is safer)77th Percentile ยท Sector
Risk ClassWatch
Risk Trend
ImprovingQoQ Delta -5 pts
Business๐ŸŸก Watch
Primary DriverLow Interest Coverage
Valuationsโ—‹ Balanced
Expectation Gap-18.8%Valuation Risk: Medium
Market Structureโœ— Weak
Stage 49 sessions

High-quality business currently experiencing weak market structure. Monitor for trend reversal. Valuations remain balanced and supported by current metrics.

Market Alignment๐ŸŸกPartial ConfirmationMarket structure shows partial alignment with the underlying fundamental risk profile.

SENTINEL REVIEW

GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited (GMRP&UI)โ€ขUpdated yesterday

EXECUTIVE FORENSIC DIAGNOSIS
27 Sept 2026

โš ๏ธ Emerging Balance Sheet Pressure: In FY2026, GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited reported a 60.5% YoY deterioration in net profit to โ‚น613.7 Cr, compared with โ‚น1,552.2 Cr in the prior year, amid intensifying margin compression. EBIT margins fell to -7.0% from 0.9% YoY, signaling structural profitability strain and an elevated risk ranking within the Power sector. This operating strain is compounded by an expanding operating leverage gap: expenses have consistently outpaced revenue growth, muting operating cash generation to โ‚น1,260.0 Cr. Coinciding with this cash flow contraction, total debt rose to โ‚น11,503.2 Cr, reducing interest coverage to 1.05x and keeping the company under heightened operational surveillance.

WHAT CHANGED THIS QUARTER
  • โœ“Risk score improved (QoQ change: -5 pts)
  • โœ“Profitability margins pressure eased (Profit Collapse resolved)
  • โœ—Growth expectations are demanding
  • โœ—Market structure is declining (Stage 4)
  • โœ—Institutional flow regime is Neutral (0.16ฯƒ)
  • โœ—Share price is down -11.2% this quarter (from โ‚น105.38 on 30 Sept to โ‚น93.54)
DUE DILIGENCE CHECKLIST
  • ๐Ÿ”ดInvestigate Low Interest Coverage and balance sheet impact
  • ๐ŸŸขProfit Collapse resolved in latest filing; verify sustainability in next filing
  • ๐ŸŸขMaintain routine quarterly surveillance; no governance escalation required
RISK CONTRIBUTORS
  • 10.0 ptsGrowth Sustainability
  • 8.6 ptsBalance Sheet Stress
  • 11.0 ptsMacro & Sector Calibration
NEED CLARIFICATION ON THIS QUARTER'S AUDIT?

Divergence Radar

BUSINESS STRENGTH70/100
VALUATION ATTRACTIVENESS (MARGIN OF SAFETY)45/100
MARKET TREND STRUCTURE15/100
INSTITUTIONAL FLOW ACCUMULATION54/100

Structural Matrix

Valuation
Business Quality
Attractive
Balanced
Demanding
Strong
Moderate
Weak
๐ŸŸก
Profile: STRONG ร— BALANCED VALUATION

Risk vs Price Timeline
Visualizing the historical relationship between the structural risk score and stock price movement over time.

Loading Chart
Share Price
Risk Score (0-100)
Market Performance
โ‚น93.54(-1.45%)
1M Divergence-1.78%
DurationPerf.Sector AvgDivergence
1 Week-2.44%-1.37%-1.07%
1 Month-8.2%-6.43%-1.78%
6 Months-12.21%+0.1%-12.31%
1 Year-20.94%-5.02%-15.92%
2 Year-22.1%+35.37%-57.47%
3 Year+190.95%+130.26%+60.68%

Business Analysis Methodology

Business analysis focuses on structural risk inside the company. Flagium monitors earnings quality, balance sheet strength, liquidity, governance, competitive position, and growth sustainability to identify areas where risk may be increasing or decreasing before it becomes obvious in reported results.

Flagium AI Risk Score30 / 100Riskier than 77% of Sector Peers
Risk Class
Watch
Risk Trend-5 QoQ ยท ImprovingRisk score improved (-5 pts)
Stress MomentumStable (0 Qtrs)Consecutive quarters worsening
Severe Risk Chance5%
Low / Manageable
Interpretation

Financial profile is stable with manageable leverage. Pressure is receding in growth sustainability. This suggests the risk profile is currently stabilizing. Risk levels are improving.

Risk Score Composition

Absolute point contribution of each forensic risk driver to the final composite risk score.
Growth Sustainability
+10.0 pts
Balance Sheet Stress
+8.6 pts
Macro & Sector Calibration+11.0 pts
(Baseline sector risk adjustment to prevent false alarms in volatile industries)
Final Composite Risk30 / 100

Investment Risk Thesis

Historical Trend

Current risk score has risen from 3 โ†’ 30 over 14 quarters.

Expected Direction
IMPROVING TRAJECTORY
Primary Deterioration Drivers
ESCOperating Leverage Stress
+1.2 pts
RESOLVEDProfit Collapse
-7.4 pts
PERSISTENTLow Interest Coverage
0.0 pts
What to Watch Next Quarter
  • Interest coverage ratio
  • Operating profit margins

Risk Drivers (Active Warnings)

Liquidity & Coverage
โ– Low Interest Coverage
HIGHPersistent
Earning Quality
โ– Operating Leverage Stress
HIGHPersistent
Decaying / Resolved Signals (12Q Surveillance)
โœ“ Profit Collapse (Q4-FY26)โœ“ Margin Compression (Q2-FY26)โœ“ Revenue-Debt Divergence (FY2024)

Primary Driver & Insights

Key Contributor
Earning Quality
โ– Operating Leverage StressHIGH
Forensic Analyst Insight

Operating leverage stress indicates a high fixed-cost base. This makes operating profit highly sensitive to any marginal drop in sales, compounding downside risk.

Advanced Business Analytics

Active Risk Objects (5)Free Preview (2 of 5)

CriticalHigh
[O1]Operating Leverage Stress
Earnings QualityQuarterlyActive for 4 Qtrs
Framework: XBRL Quarterly
Leverage GapHigh Tier
+10.9%Expense > Rev
Signal MomentumPersistent
Historical Baseline12-Qtr Median: -2.2%
Empirical Trigger

Expenses are consistently growing faster than revenues, creating operational pressure.

Forensic Implication

Margins are in freefall. Operating costs are growing significantly faster than revenue.

Statutory XBRLFiling Period: Q1 FY2027
[F4]Low Interest Coverage
Liquidity & CoverageQuarterlyActive for 11 Qtrs
Framework: XBRL Quarterly
CoverageCritical Tier
1.05xEBIT โ‚น335 Cr
Signal MomentumPersistent
Historical BaselineSolvency Floor: 2.50x
Empirical Trigger

GMRP&UI: Low Interest Coverage Ratio of 1.05x in FY2027 Q1 (Threshold: 2.5x).

Forensic Implication

Interest coverage is dangerously low. Even a minor fall in profit could trigger a default.

Statutory XBRLFiling Period: Q1 FY2027
๐Ÿ”’
โญ Pro Forensic Intelligence

Unlock All 5 Forensic Signals (3 Additional Warnings Gated)

Free accounts preview the top 2 highest-impact warning signals. Upgrade to Flagium Pro to inspect all 5 active forensic detectors, multi-quarter duration streaks, and financial stress metrics for GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited.

Unlock with Pro Free โ†’๐ŸŽ 3-Month Free Trial Available

Statutory Note: Forensic signals are algorithmic quantitative observations derived from publicly filed XBRL disclosures and do not constitute allegations of legal misconduct or investment recommendations.

Unlock Interactive Signal Evidence Dossier

Access complete multi-quarter financial evidence, 5-KPI snapshot strips, diagnostic hypotheses, and 1-page forensic PDF dossiers for GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited.

Risk Trajectory
Historical 12-quarter risk trend (Q-11 to Q0) followed by a 2-quarter predictive funnel (Q+1, Q+2).
Loading Chart
Business Stability
Key indicators of structural risk, cash buffer capability, and risk progression.
Shock ResistanceHigh
Severe Risk ChanceLow
Financial StabilityHigh
Margin of SafetyHigh
Forensic Benchmark Context: Power (n=28 peers)

Structural Risk Attribution

Auditable forensic risk attribution explaining why the Flagium AI Risk Score changed between quarters. Deconstructs the score delta into new triggers, severity escalations, cross-pillar contagion overlays, and rules no longer triggered in the latest quarter.

Deterministic quarter-on-quarter causal decomposition grounded in statutory exchange filings.

Peer Benchmark:Power(n=28 peers)
Median Risk: 19.5/100Position: 77th Percentile

Historical Trajectory (12Q)

โ† Swipe older12Q window
17/100
Base
17/100
12/100
7/100
5/100
10/100
15/100
35/100
BREAK
30/100
25/100
35/100
30/100
LATEST
35โž”30/100
โ–ผ5-point improvement(Q4 FY26 โž” Q1 FY27)
Auditable forensic risk attribution explaining why the Flagium AI Risk Score changed between quarters.
Executive Synthesis:

Risk improved moderately (-5.0 pts), driven by Profit Collapse (-7.4 pts), partially offset by Operating Leverage Stress (+1.2 pts).

Reconciliation Bridgeยท Swipe โž”
Deterministic Statutory Flow
Base35Q4 FY26
โž”
+ New Stress+1.21 flag
โž”
- Resolved-7.41 flag cleared
โž”
Scaling & Drift
Net calibration combining economic pillar capacity ceiling (-9.8 pts) and temporal volatility dampening (+11 pts).
+1.2Pillar Cap & Drift
โž”
Terminal30-5 net ยท Q1 FY27
What Changed This Quarter2 Active Catalysts
Escalated Stress (1 Flag)
+1.2 pts
Growth SustainabilityยทEscalated Risk
โ€ข Trigger:Operating expense growth outpaced revenue growth, breaching operating leverage stress threshold.
Revenue YoY:-1.1%Op. Expenses YoY:-6.3%Operating Margin:-2.2% โ†’ 1.0%
Normalized & Resolved (1 Flag)
-7.4 pts
Earnings QualityยทBelow Risk Threshold
โ€ข Cause:Net profit rebounded or base-effect losses normalized, clearing the profit contraction threshold.
PAT YoY:Deficit (N/M)
Risk Pillar Changes
Net shift in risk score points contributed by each fundamental economic pillar between the two quarters.
6 Fundamental Pillars
Balance Sheet Stressโ€”
Q4 FY26: 8.6โ†’Q1 FY27: 8.6
Competitive Positionโ€”
Q4 FY26: 0โ†’Q1 FY27: 0
Earnings Quality-7.4 pts
Q4 FY26: 7.4โ†’Q1 FY27: 0
Governanceโ€”
Q4 FY26: 0โ†’Q1 FY27: 0
Growth Sustainabilityโ€”
Q4 FY26: 10โ†’Q1 FY27: 10
Solvencyโ€”
Q4 FY26: 0โ†’Q1 FY27: 0
Persistent Background Risk (1)
Indicators that remained active across both quarters at the same severity level with no net change.

12Q Structural Regimes & Inflections

Deterministic macro trajectory milestones
STRUCTURAL BREAK โ€” Q1 FY2615 โ†’ 35 | +20 pts

Risk deteriorated materially (+20.0 pts), driven by Operating Leverage Stress (+5.3 pts) and Low Interest Coverage (+4.5 pts), partially offset by Profit Collapse relief (-3.2 pts).

Forensic Trajectory Shifts:
โ€ขOperating Leverage Stress Escalation: Contribution increased by +5.3 pts (severity unchanged at HIGH)
โ€ขLow Interest Coverage Escalation: Severity escalated from MEDIUM to HIGH
โ€ขRevenue YoY: +1.9%
โ€ขOp. Expenses YoY: +6.6%

Business Resilience & Benchmark Context

Overall: STRONG
Solvency(10)Excellentโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…
โ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆ100th %ile
Governance(10)Excellentโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…
โ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆ100th %ile
Earnings Quality(10)Excellentโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…
โ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆ100th %ile
Balance Sheet Stress(4.2)Weakโ˜…โ˜…โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†
โ–ˆโ–ˆโ–‘โ–‘โ–‘42th %ile
Competitive Position(10)Excellentโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…
โ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆโ–ˆ100th %ile
Growth Sustainability(0)Weakโ˜…โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†
โ–‘โ–‘โ–‘โ–‘โ–‘0th %ile

PEER COMPARISON MATRIX

Ranked surveillance & credit risk comparison against sector peers

Company displays higher risk profile compared to the Sector Mean (19.5).

* Peer comparison is based on risk signals, not valuation or returns.

Unlock 5-Year Forensic Divergence Cockpit

Access multi-year visual divergence charts (EBITDA vs CFO Cash Gap, Receivables Decoupling Spread, and Debt vs FCF Burn) for GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Financial SummaryAudited ยท Consolidated
Operating Margin (OPM)
38.5%
Weakeningโ†“
Cash Conversion (CCC)
19 Days
Weakeningโ†“
Debt / Equity Ratio
5.46x
Deterioratingโ†‘
Revenue Trend
โ‚น7,748 Cr
Growingโ†‘
Swipe for all periods โ‡†
MetricFY2026FY2025FY2024FY2023FY20223Y CAGR
Structural triggersโ€“โ€“โ€“
Revenue7,7486,8584,8355,8924,282+10%
growth % YoY+13.0%+41.8%โˆ’17.9%+37.6%โ€”โ€”
EBITDA2,9844,0811,8621,992690+14%
margin %38.5%59.5%38.5%33.8%16.1%โ€”
Net Profit6141,552(127)1,139(652)-19%
margin %7.9%22.6%-2.6%19.3%-15.2%โ€”
CFO1,2602,8331,6901,2301,215+1%
CFO / Net Profit2.05x1.82x-13.26x1.08x-1.86xโ€”
Debt11,50310,23813,8558,201โ€”+12%
Structural triggers first appear in FY2024 (ringed).

Working Capital & Forensic Monitor

Operating Cycle Disclosuresยท6 Fiscal Years

Forensic Accounting Signals:Persistent Inventoryโ€“Revenue Divergence: Inventory outpaced sales for 3 consecutive years
Cash Conversion Cycle
19 days-32d YoY
Receivables:-35d
Inventory:+3d
Payables:0d
Net Working Capital
โ‚น391 Cr
5-Year Average Cycle: -30 days
Earnings-to-Cash Divergence
โ‚น-646 Cr
PAT โˆ’ CFO (Cash Surplus)
5Y Cum: โ‚น-5,701 Cr
Accrual Quality Monitor
Clean (Cash Backed)
Accruals: -3.8% of Avg Assets

Working Capital Schedule (INR Cr)

Metric / RatioFY2026FY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022FY2021
Trade Receivables(โ‚น Cr)
1,1801,7051,541545โ€”โ€”
Inventories(โ‚น Cr)
49939521250โ€”โ€”
Trade Payables(โ‚น Cr)
1,2881,1552,5962,604โ€”โ€”
Net Working Capital(โ‚น Cr)
391945-843-2,009โ€”โ€”
Working Capital / Sales(%)
5.0%13.8%-17.4%-34.1%โ€”โ€”

Cash Conversion & Operating Cycle (Days)

Metric / RatioFY2026FY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022FY2021
Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC)(days)
19d51d-64d-124dโ€”โ€”
Debtor Days (DSO)(days)
56d91d116d34dโ€”โ€”
Inventory Days (DIO)(days)
24d21d16d3dโ€”โ€”
Creditor Days (DPO)(days)
61d61d196d161dโ€”โ€”

Forensic Accounting Monitor & Divergences

Metric / RatioFY2026FY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022FY2021
Receivable Growth vs Sales (ฮ”)(%)
-43.8%-31.2%+200.9%โ€”โ€”โ€”
Inventory Growth vs Sales (ฮ”)(%)
+13.4%+44.5%+339.6%โ€”โ€”โ€”
Asset Growth vs Sales (ฮ”)(%)
-12.6%-54.6%+82.9%โ€”โ€”โ€”
Earnings-to-Cash Divergence (PAT - CFO)(โ‚น Cr)
-646-1,280-1,818-91-1,866-2,773
Accrual Ratio (Accruals / Avg Assets)(%)
-3.8%-7.0%-11.6%-0.8%โ€”-18.0%
Operating Cash Realisation (CFO / EBITDA)(%)
โ€”28074.7%โ€”โ€”โ€”1336.4%
Capitalisation Intensity (CWIP / Assets)(%)
โ€”โ€”โ€”โ€”โ€”โ€”

Industry Intelligence

Power KPIs
Gross Margin
โ“˜
Q1 FY2027
Current87.8%
QoQ Change+890 bpsโ†‘ Operating efficiency gains
YoY Change-320 bpsโ†“ Profitability contraction
Industry Median48.5%
EBITDA Margin
โ“˜
Q1 FY2027
Current28.4%
QoQ Change+310 bpsโ†‘ Operating efficiency gains
YoY Change-470 bpsโ†“ Profitability contraction
Industry Median15.5%
Asset Turnover
โ“˜
Q1 FY2027
Current0.11x
QoQ Change-8.3%โ†“ Asset utilization moderating
YoY Changeโ€”โ†’ Stable asset efficiency
Industry Median1.15x

Understanding Power KPIs

Gross Margin: Revenue minus cost of materials as % of revenue. Measures pricing power. Learn More โ†’
EBITDA Margin: EBITDA divided by revenue. Core operational profitability metric. Learn More โ†’
Asset Turnover: Revenue generated per rupee of asset base. Measures asset efficiency. Learn More โ†’
Shareholding Pattern & Pledging Monitor12QZero Pledge
Promoter holding down 13.30 pp across 12 quarters โ€” requires monitoring
Promoter holding 46.53% (โˆ’13.30 pp across 12 quarters) ยท zero pledge or encumbrance ยท institutional holding 21.93%
Q2 FY2027 ยท latest disclosed quarter
Net Capital Flow (Q2 FY2027):FII +0.34 ppDII +0.1 ppPromoters +0.25 ppPublic -0.69 pp
FII+DII Net: +0.44 pp
Latest Ownership Distribution (Q2 FY2027)100.00%
Promoters (46.53%)
FII (16.35%)
DII (5.58%)
Public (31.54%)
Quarterly Progression
Total Pledged (% Eq)0.00%โ€”
1 unchanged โ€” Government 0.00% across 12 quarters

* Sourced from quarterly shareholding pattern disclosures filed under Regulation 31 of SEBI (LODR) Regulations. Pledged shares include encumbrances, non-disposal undertakings (NDU), and liens.

๐ŸŽ™๏ธ

Concall & Management Takeaways

Investor Earnings Call Transcripts & Tone Analysis

No investor earnings call transcripts transcribed for this scrip.

Earnings call intelligence is automatically populated when companies conduct quarterly earnings calls with institutional investors and publish transcripts.

Sentinel Forensic AssessmentALGORITHMIC RISK PROFILE โ€ข NON-ADVISORY
Fundamental Status

Business quality remains strong.

Forensic Pressure

Current forensic pressure is elevated and improving.

Primary Risk Vectors

Key risks remain concentrated in growth sustainability and operating leverage.

The risk profile is Early Signals and currently improving. Recent structural triggers in growth sustainability suggest a building pressure on the underlying framework. Material forensic traces are visible in core structural metrics, indicating a progressive erosion of structural stability. Initial structural recovery is visible; monitor for a sustained return to resilience.

Market Expectation Engine

BALANCED EXPECTATIONS

Investor Translation โ€ข What the market price is expecting

Expectation Engine

At the current price of โ‚น94, the market expects this company to grow its net profits by 21.8% every year for the next 5 years. If you think the company will grow faster than 21.8%, current market prices reflect a discount relative to that growth assumption.

Sentinel Takeaway:The market expects future growth in line with the company's historical delivery. Current market expectations appear balanced relative to the business's track record, representing standard expectation risk.

Market-Implied Growth21.8%Future Growth Needed
Historical Delivery-9.2%Actual Past Growth
Expectation Gap+30.9%Growth Jump Needed
Expectation Risk51/100Price Risk Score
CONSERVATIVE (-11%)BALANCEDDEMANDING (24%)
Historical (-9.2%)
Market (21.8%)
Valuation Summary

Using the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) model, the market is pricing GMRP&UI for 21.8% long-term growth versus -9.2% historical delivery. Current expectations appear demanding, and historical fundamentals provide moderate support.

Business Delivery Capacity

Performance quality vs historical benchmarks
Historical Delivery Assessment
Revenue Growth SupportObserved CAGR vs cost of capital baseline
-9.2% CAGR
โœ— Weak
Operating Profitability SupportEBIT margins compared to historical standards
-3.9% Margin
โœ— Weak Margin
Cash Flow Generation SupportOperating cash flow conversion and support cushion
10000.0% Conv
โœ“ Positive
Capital Leverage RiskLeverage indicators and solvency pressure
Pressure
โœ— Leverage Risk
Delivery Capacity Index
30/100
LOW CAPACITY

Historical business performance currently provides limited support for the market's implied growth assumptions. Improvement in revenue growth and operating efficiency would strengthen expectation support.

WHY IS EXPECTATION RISK ELEVATED?

Risk Drivers:
โœ“High implied growth
โœ“Weak historical delivery
โœ“Weak profitability support

Valuation Context

Historical Valuation59th percentile
Cash Yield Support13.99% (Strong)
Sector Premium-36% EV/EBITDA
Current Valuation RegimeBalanced

WHAT MUST HAPPEN FOR CURRENT PRICE TO BE CORRECT?

MARKET REQUIRED METRICS
Assumption MetricRequired (To justify current price)Historical Delivery (Average)Fulfillment Assessment
Revenue Growth (CAGR)21.8%-9.2%Aggressive
Operating Margin (EBIT)-2.7%-3.9%Demanding
Free Cash Flow Conversion19.4%10000.0%Achievable

*Required metrics indicate the operating efficiency and revenue expansion parameters that must be sustained long-term to justify the current stock price.

Advanced Valuation Analytics
Sentinel Expectation Assessment

The current valuation assumes business performance broadly in line with the company's historical record. Historical operating performance currently provides limited evidence that these expectations are sustainable. Continued revenue acceleration and stronger profitability would be required to justify current pricing.

Market Structure Methodology

Flagium separates Business Risk from Market Structure. Business analysis explains what is happening inside the company. Market Structure measures how investors are behaving through price trends, momentum, participation, and institutional activity. Divergences between the two often reveal important transitions before they become obvious.

Market Structure
STAGE 4
DOWNTRENDCAPITAL EROSION RISK
Stage Progress
Measures the progress of the stock's current price, volume, and momentum characteristic alignments.
5%
TrendDeclining
MomentumNeutral
ParticipationNeutral
A/D FlowImproving
Sentinel Market Insight

The stock remains in a confirmed Stage 4 declining phase. Although institutional participation has improved, trend quality remains weak and momentum continues to deteriorate. Current price action does not yet confirm a structural recovery.

What Is Driving Market Structure?

Market Drivers
โœ—Long-term trend remains below the 150DMA
โœ—Long-term trend remains below the 200DMA
โœ—RS continues to lag the market
โœ“Institutional flow has improved
โœ—Momentum remains negative
Summary
๐ŸŸกPartial Confirmation

Market structure shows partial alignment with the underlying fundamental risk profile.

Market Cycle Stage Analysis

Stan Weinstein 4-Stage Cycle
S1
Base Building(Institutional accumulation & base building)
S2
Strong Uptrend(Ideal breakout & momentum zone)
S3
Topping Out(Institutional distribution & profit taking)
S4
Downtrend(Elevated capital erosion risk)
Stage Lifecycle
Stage Progress
5%
Readiness LabelLow (Early Base Consolidation)
Regime Sessions9 Sessions
Transition Probability0% Low
Measures the alignment and consistency of the stock's price trend relative to its historical volume volatility.
0.9804ฯƒ Neutral
Trend & Strength
Trend QualityDeteriorating
150 DMA Slope-1.4101%
Participation & Volume
Total rupee value of shares actually delivered into buyers' Demat accounts today (excluding intraday trades). Delivery % indicates what portion of today's total trade was held as delivery rather than squared off intraday.
โ‚น1.6 Cr48.01% Delivery (High Conviction)
Compares the 21-day average delivery turnover against the 200-day long-term baseline. Delivery expansion above baseline confirms a structural accumulation trend.
โ–ผ 33.1% (21D vs 200D Avg)Delivery Volume Drying Up
Avg Turnover (200D)
The 200-day average daily traded turnover in โ‚น Crore. Represents baseline trading depth and capacity to enter or exit positions with minimal slippage.
โ‚น16.4 Cr
Liquidity Rating
Categorizes trading liquidity based on 200-day average turnover: Liquid (โ‰ฅโ‚น100 Cr/day), Low Liquidity (โ‚น50โ€“โ‚น100 Cr/day), or Illiquid (<โ‚น50 Cr/day) for sizing and slippage risk control.
Illiquid (High Slippage Risk)
Participation
Evaluates current volume participation against historical baseline turnover. Healthy (โ‰ฅ1.2x) confirms active broad-market sponsorship, while Weak (<0.8x) indicates lack of volume conviction.
Neutral

Momentum & Institutional Flow

Price Momentum
Momentum StrengthWeakening momentum trend
Price momentum score in standard deviations (ฯƒ). Readings beyond ยฑ2.0ฯƒ indicate extreme momentum shifts.
-0.1239ฯƒ
Universe Rank
#1128 of 2259Top 49.93% in momentum strength
Institutional Accumulation
21D Flow Score
21-day cumulative institutional flow score in standard deviations (ฯƒ).
+0.16ฯƒ
7D Flow TrendImproving
GMRP&UI
STAGE 4 โ€ข DECLINE
โ€”
C:โ€”
Loading Market Structure Data...

Methodology & Regulatory Disclaimer

Flagium AI is an automated financial data analytics and research platform providing quantitative risk, forensic, and valuation analytics for informational and educational purposes only. Flagium AI is not registered with SEBI as a Research Analyst or Investment Adviser under SEBI regulations. These analytics do not constitute financial planning, investment advice, or recommendations to buy, sell, or hold any security.

Investments in securities market are subject to market risks. Read all the related documents carefully before investing. Please consult a SEBI-registered Investment Adviser before acting on any data presented.

๐Ÿ“ฌ Flagium Risk Brief โ€” Track forensic risks on GMRP&UI & 3 market anomalies weekly

See a sample issue โ†’