Orient Cables (India)
FinMinutes Deep Business Model & Edge
Orient Cables (India) Limited is an Indian manufacturer specializing in networking cables, optical fibre cables, and passive networking equipment with nearly two decades of operational track record. The company supplies customized connectivity and power solutions to high-growth sectors including telecom, broadband, data centres, renewable energy, and smart building automation.
What this company actually does — full breakdown ▾
Orient Cables (India) Limited is a manufacturing company with a primary focus on networking cables and passive networking equipment, operating for nearly two decades and serving high-growth industries including broadband, telecommunications, data centres, renewable energy, smart building automation, and automotive. The company's product portfolio spans four main segments: Networking Cables and Solutions (CAT5, CAT5e, CAT6, CAT6A cables, patch cords, CCTV, and coaxial cables), Specialty Power and Optical Fibre Cables (power cables, unitube/multitube optical fibre cables up to 288 fibres), Wire and Cable Harness Assemblies/EV Charging Cables, and Other Allied Products (keystone jacks, patch panels, power strips). Orient Cables operates three manufacturing units located in Bhiwadi, Rajasthan, and Bengaluru, Karnataka, featuring in-house testing labs and specialized production lines, including electron beam (E-beam) irradiation facilities for specialty solar cables. The company caters to marquee domestic and international clientele across 14 countries (including UAE, Qatar, USA, UK, and Netherlands), deriving 90.74% of its FY26 revenue from domestic markets and 9.26% from exports. On scale, Orient Cables generated ₹ 1171.65 crore in consolidated revenue from operations in Fiscal 2026, delivering a revenue CAGR of 33.46% between Fiscal 2024 and Fiscal 2026, with a market share of approximately 22.9% in the Indian networking cables market.
- Networking Cables and Solutions — CAT5, CAT5e, CAT6, CAT6A UTP cables, patch cords, CCTV, coaxial cables, and terminated cable assemblies.
- Specialty Power, Optical Fibre Cables and Solutions — Low-tension power cables, unitube and multitube optical fibre cables up to 288 fibres, and elevator lift cables.
- Wire and Cable Harness Assemblies, EV Charging Guns Cable Assembly — Integrated EV charging cable assemblies, charging guns, and specialized automotive wiring harnesses.
- Other Allied Products — Passive networking hardware including keystone jacks, surface mount boxes, patch panels, and power strips.
Market leadership as one of India's top players in networking cables with a 22.9% market share in FY26, early-mover advantage in keystone jacks, integrated manufacturing infrastructure across Bhiwadi and Bengaluru, global product certifications (UL, ETL, CPR, RDSO, TSEC), and sticky, long-standing customer relationships averaging over 9 years with top 10 clients.
The Offer
Follow the Money — Use of Proceeds
- Funding of capital expenditure requirements of our Company towards purchase of machinery, equipment and civil works at our Manufacturing Facilities — ₹91.50 cr
- Repayment or prepayment, in full or in part, of all or a portion of certain outstanding borrowings availed by our Company — ₹155.50 cr
- General corporate purposes
Valuation at the Offer Price
The filing does not print a single headline multiple, so this one is ours: the upper band divided by the latest restated earnings per share — the same arithmetic the “Basis for the Offer Price” section performs. It is struck on pre-issue earnings; where the issue creates new shares, the post-issue multiple is computed in the workings below. The peer group is the one the filing itself names. A premium is not the same thing as expensive and a discount is not the same thing as cheap — the peer table and the reasons sit further down this page.
FinMinutes IPO Score — How It's Built
Transparent, deterministic, computed from the filing — not an opinion. Open any component below to see exactly what it measures and what it is worth. Components with no disclosed input are dropped from the weighting entirely rather than held at an invented neutral, because a constant inside a weighted average is not neutral — it quietly drags every score toward the middle. Weighted across 5 live components.
100% of the designed weighting had real data behind it on this issue. A lower coverage figure does not mean a worse company — it means we are standing behind less of the picture, and you should read the findings below rather than the headline number.
How this is measured12%
Whether fresh capital actually enters the business. A predominantly offer-for-sale issue is marked down ONLY when the financials are weak. A profitable, cash-rich company selling down is treated as neutral, not penalised, because it does not need the money.
How this is measured12%
What changed between the draft prospectus and the final one. A period roll-forward or a refreshed industry report is expected and scores neutral. A statutory auditor replaced mid-process, a prior year restated, an offer-for-sale expanded late, new statutory dues disclosed, or a risk factor quietly removed all score against. Where only one of the two documents has been read, this component is dropped from the weighting rather than guessed.
How this is measured32%
Driven by the models battery run on the filing's own restated numbers: the Piotroski fundamental tests (scored out of those we could actually run), the Altman Z-double-prime solvency zone, and the direction of profit across the disclosed period. It is not a single yes/no on last year's profit.
How this is measured10%
The post-issue earnings multiple against the peer median disclosed in the filing. A discount to the median scores well and a premium scores badly. When the filing does not disclose comparable peer multiples, this component is dropped from the weighting rather than held at a made-up neutral.
How this is measured28%
Starts at 100 and loses points for every material finding: 12 for a flagged finding, 4 for a noted one. Two kinds feed it. DERIVED findings are computed from the filed numbers against stated thresholds — operating cash negative while profit is positive, related-party revenue above 15% of total, revenue rising while profit falls, goodwill above 30% of net worth, receivables growing more than 1.3x faster than sales, cash below half of short-term debt. Those are reproducible: the same filing gives the same answer every time, and the rule is printed beside the finding. READ findings come from the forensic sweep of the notes. Contingent liabilities, related-party intensity, customer concentration, litigation, auditor qualifications, statutory dues, promoter funding. Findings that record the ABSENCE of a problem — no litigation pending, an unmodified audit opinion — deduct nothing. This is the component our forensic read drives directly, and it moves most between companies.
3-Year Financial & Growth Trend
| Metric | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue (₹ Cr) | 1171.65 | 824.96 | 657.77 |
| Net Profit (₹ Cr) | 53.56 | 53.32 | 40.07 |
| PAT Margin | 4.57% | 6.46% | 6.09% |
Revenue Breakdown
- Networking Cables and Solutions: 78.23%
- Specialty Power, Optical Fibre Cables and Solutions: 21.37%
- Other Allied Products: 0.39%
- Wire and Cable Harness Assemblies, EV Charging Guns Cable Assembly: 0.01%
Market Context
NOT part of the FinMinutes ScoreThe Score above is what the filing says. Everything in this box is what the crowd says. We keep them apart on purpose — every other site blends the two and calls the result a rating. Demand is real information, but it is information about the market, not about the company, and it changes by the hour while the company does not.
Demand and our read of the filing are broadly in the same territory.
Subscription is low early in a book and high at the end, because most bids arrive in the final hours. A number read on day one says more about the clock than the company — which is precisely why it is not in the Score. GMP is unofficial, unregulated, and easily moved. Neither is a recommendation.
Why the numbers moved, in management’s own words
Taken from the Management’s Discussion and Analysis section of the filing. A number tells you what happened; this is the company’s explanation of why, and whether it calls the cause temporary or structural.
| Metric | Move | Management's stated reason | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue from operations (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 42.0% | Revenue from operations increased primarily due to higher sales volumes of networking cables and a 155.30% growth in specialty power and optical fibre cables driven by customer expansion. | Structural |
| Cost of materials consumed (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 46.1% | Cost of materials consumed grew in line with revenue expansion due to higher sales volumes and increased raw material consumption alongside input cost inflation. | Structural |
| Employee benefits expense (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 38.5% | Employee benefit expenses increased due to share-based payment expenses of ₹ 1.52 crore, annual increments, and an increase in workforce from 1,497 to 1,696. | Structural |
| Finance costs (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 52.8% | Finance costs increased primarily due to a 142.36% rise in interest paid to banks on higher short-term working capital borrowings and long-term term loans. | Structural |
| Depreciation and amortisation expense (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 124.5% | Depreciation and amortisation expenses rose sharply due to property, plant and equipment additions from Unit II expansion and right-of-use asset capitalisation. | Structural |
| Other expenses (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 38.6% | Other expenses increased due to higher consumption of stores and spares, power and fuel, and freight charges supporting scaled-up manufacturing operations. | Structural |
| Trade receivables (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 34.5% | Trade receivables expanded alongside top-line growth and increased sales volume, reflecting normal credit terms offered to key telecom and enterprise clients. | Structural |
| Inventories (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 54.8% | Inventories increased as part of a planned stock build-up in raw materials and finished goods to meet growing customer order fulfillment requirements. | Structural |
| Total borrowings (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 106.4% | Total borrowings doubled primarily due to higher working capital credit facility utilisation and term loans drawn to fund Unit II plant expansion. | Structural |
| Operating cash flow (FY26 vs FY25) | ↓ 172.3% | Operating cash flow turned negative due to significant working capital deployment into inventories and trade receivables as business scale expanded. | Structural |
| Revenue from operations (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 25.4% | Revenue grew by 25.42% driven by a 32.05% increase in networking cables and solutions sales volume across domestic broadband and enterprise channels. | Structural |
| Cost of materials consumed (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 25.1% | Raw material consumption grew proportionally to support higher manufacturing and sales volumes. | Structural |
| Employee benefits expense (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 39.1% | Employee expenses rose due to headcount expansion from 1,133 to 1,497 and annual salary increments. | Structural |
| Finance costs (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 124.5% | Finance costs more than doubled due to increased bank borrowings drawn for working capital and long-term capital expenditure. | Structural |
| Restated PAT (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 33.1% | Net profit expanded due to higher sales volume, revenue growth, and fixed cost absorption. | Structural |
| Total borrowings (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 208.9% | Total debt expanded due to additional short-term working capital borrowings and term loans taken for Unit II facility construction. | Structural |
Headwinds
- Copper and Polymer Raw Material Price Volatility sector persistent
Fluctuations in LME copper prices and crude oil-linked PVC/PE compound costs exert pressure on production margins, requiring active back-to-back procurement strategies. - Supplier Concentration Risk company persistent
Top 10 suppliers account for ~70% of raw material procurement in FY26, exposing operations to potential supply chain disruptions or reduced bargaining power. - Trade Protectionism and Tariffs in Overseas Markets sector persistent
EU anti-dumping duties of up to 11.4% and US reciprocal tariffs of up to 26% on telecom products increase landed export costs, affecting international price competitiveness.
Tailwinds
- Digital Infrastructure Expansion and 5G/BharatNet Rollouts macro
Government initiatives such as BharatNet, 5G network expansion, and data centre proliferation drive rapid structural demand growth for networking and optical fibre cables. - Rising Demand in Renewable Energy and Electric Mobility sector
Accelerating solar installations and EV adoption expand the total addressable market for specialised E-beam irradiated solar cables and EV charging cable assemblies.
| Facility | Period | Utilisation |
|---|---|---|
| Unit I (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY26 | 81.4% |
| Unit I (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY25 | 91.2% |
| Unit I (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY24 | 75.3% |
| Unit I (Bhiwadi) - Other Allied Products (Keystone Jacks) | FY26 | 6.2% |
| Unit I (Bhiwadi) - Other Allied Products (Keystone Jacks) | FY25 | 4.6% |
| Unit II (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY26 | 65.3% |
| Unit II (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY25 | 74.6% |
| Unit II (Bhiwadi) - Cables | FY24 | 73.9% |
Issue Timeline
Dates as carried by the exchange feed. Allotment, refund and credit dates move more often than the open and close dates do.
- Refunds initiated2026-10-01
- Pre Application Start2026-09-24
- Bidding Start2026-09-25
- Bidding End2026-09-29
- Allotment Process Start2026-09-30
- Allotment Finalization2026-10-01
- Listing Day2026-10-05
- Mandate End2026-11-10
Applying, and Who Handles the Allotment
Check allotment status on the registrar’s own portal → We link the registrar directly rather than mirroring the form.
Deep Financials
Revenue, EBITDA and profit are what every listing site prints. Below are the full restated statements as disclosed, the ratios we compute from them, and a DuPont decomposition of the return on equity. A prospectus carries three years, not ten — that is the document’s ceiling, and within it we go as deep as it allows.
Income StatementThe profit and loss as filed, then what we derive from it — kept apart.
Statutory order, exactly as restated in the filing. Finance cost and depreciation sit inside Total Expenses under Ind AS, which is why they are listed among the expense lines here rather than below the total. The expense rows sum to the total. Rows the filing does not disclose separately are omitted rather than left blank.
| Income Statement — as filed (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue from Operations | 1,171.65 | 824.96 | 657.77 |
| Other Income | 10.02 | 6.91 | 7.21 |
| Total Income | 1,181.67 | 831.86 | 664.98 |
| Cost of Materials Consumed | 958.32 | 655.90 | 524.43 |
| Changes in Inventories | -16.85 | -11.36 | -8.51 |
| Employee Benefit Expense | 59.48 | 42.93 | 30.86 |
| Finance Cost | 19.10 | 12.50 | 5.57 |
| Depreciation & Amortisation | 14.72 | 6.56 | 6.11 |
| Other Expenses | 74.31 | 53.62 | 52.17 |
| Total Expenses | 1,109.07 | 760.15 | 610.62 |
| Profit Before Exceptional Items and Tax | 72.60 | 71.71 | 54.36 |
| Exceptional Items | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Profit Before Tax | 72.60 | 71.71 | 54.36 |
| Tax Expense | 19.04 | 18.39 | 14.29 |
| Profit After Tax | 53.56 | 53.32 | 40.07 |
| Other Comprehensive Income | 0.03 | -0.16 | -0.08 |
| Total Comprehensive Income | 53.59 | 53.16 | 39.99 |
| EPS - Basic | 5.27 | 5.23 | 3.93 |
| EPS - Diluted | 5.27 | 5.23 | 3.93 |
Balance SheetWhat the company owns, owes, and is worth on paper.
| Balance Sheet (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Share Capital | 10.20 | 10.20 | 1.02 |
| Reserves & Surplus | 225.86 | 170.50 | 126.52 |
| Net Worth | 235.84 | 180.70 | 127.54 |
| Long-term Borrowings | 35.73 | 27.45 | 3.37 |
| Short-term Borrowings | 198.46 | 86.00 | 33.37 |
| Total Borrowings | 234.19 | 113.45 | 36.73 |
| Trade Payables | 95.40 | 120.09 | 116.82 |
| Current Liabilities | 305.60 | 215.34 | 161.13 |
| Total Liabilities | 344.95 | 246.49 | 165.68 |
| Property, Plant & Equipment | 189.27 | 130.95 | 56.38 |
| Capital Work in Progress | 1.98 | 2.54 | 23.17 |
| Intangible Assets | 0.57 | 0.17 | 0.20 |
| Investments | 7.89 | 7.49 | 6.88 |
| Inventories | 112.58 | 72.75 | 40.35 |
| Trade Receivables | 218.12 | 162.17 | 136.41 |
| Cash & Equivalents | 12.89 | 1.45 | 7.95 |
| Current Assets | 384.92 | 259.13 | 208.88 |
| Total Assets | 580.79 | 427.19 | 293.22 |
Cash FlowWhere the cash actually went. Often the most honest statement of the three.
| Cash Flow (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net Cash from Operating Activities | -26.64 | -9.79 | 42.18 |
| Capital Expenditure | 73.04 | 60.10 | 32.71 |
| Net Cash from Investing Activities | -63.58 | -59.82 | -32.69 |
| Net Cash from Financing Activities | 101.66 | 63.11 | -6.10 |
| Net Change in Cash | 11.44 | -6.50 | 3.39 |
Ratio AnalysisProfitability, leverage, liquidity, efficiency and earnings quality — computed by us.
Every ratio below is computed by us from the line items the company disclosed — not copied from anywhere. The arithmetic is standard; the point is that somebody actually did it. Blank cells mean the filing did not disclose the inputs, and we would rather show a gap than invent a number.
| Ratio | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Profitability | |||
| EBITDA Margin (%) | 9 | 10.9 | 9.9 |
| EBIT Margin (%) | 7.8 | 10.1 | 9 |
| PAT Margin (%) | 4.6 | 6.5 | 6.1 |
| Return on Equity (%) | 22.7 | 29.5 | 31.4 |
| Return on Capital Employed (%) | 19.5 | 28.6 | 36.5 |
| Return on Assets (%) | 9.2 | 12.5 | 13.7 |
| Leverage | |||
| Debt / Equity (x) | 0.99 | 0.63 | 0.29 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA (x) | 2.08 | 1.23 | 0.44 |
| Interest Coverage (x) | 4.8 | 6.74 | 10.76 |
| Liquidity | |||
| Current Ratio (x) | 1.26 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| Quick Ratio (x) | 0.89 | 0.87 | 1.05 |
| Efficiency | |||
| Asset Turnover (x) | 2.02 | 1.93 | 2.24 |
| Receivable Days | 68 | 72 | 76 |
| Inventory Days | 35 | 32 | 22 |
| Payable Days | 30 | 53 | 65 |
| Cash Conversion Cycle (days) | 73 | 51 | 33 |
| Quality of Earnings | |||
| Operating Cash Flow / PAT (x) | -0.5 | -0.18 | 1.05 |
| Accruals Ratio (%) | 13.8 | 14.8 | -0.7 |
| Capex / Depreciation (x) | 4.96 | 9.16 | 5.35 |
DuPont DecompositionWhy the return on equity is what it is: margin, efficiency, or leverage.
A headline return on equity tells you what. The DuPont decomposition tells you why — whether the return is earned through margin, through asset efficiency, or simply through leverage. Two companies can post an identical ROE for opposite reasons, and only one of them is safe.
| Component | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net Margin (PAT / Revenue) | 4.6% | 6.5% | 6.1% |
| Asset Turnover (Revenue / Assets) | 2.02x | 1.93x | 2.24x |
| Equity Multiplier (Assets / Net Worth) | 2.46x | 2.36x | 2.3x |
| = Return on Equity | 22.7% | 29.5% | 31.4% |
| Tax Burden (PAT / PBT) | 0.74x | 0.74x | 0.74x |
| Interest Burden (PBT / EBIT) | 0.79x | 0.85x | 0.91x |
| Operating Margin (EBIT / Revenue) | 7.8% | 10.2% | 9.1% |
Computed from the disclosed statements. Where the filing omits an input, the row is left blank rather than estimated.
Quality of EarningsWhat the statements say when you read them against each other.
What the statements say once you read them against each other. These are observations, not verdicts — every one is arithmetic on the numbers the company itself disclosed, and each is stated so you can go and check it in the filing.
- In FY26 the company reported a profit of 53.56 cr while operating cash flow was NEGATIVE at -26.64 cr. Reported earnings did not convert into cash. This is the single divergence most worth understanding in any set of accounts, and the filing is the place to look for why.
Forensic ModelsBeneish, Altman and Piotroski — plus our own final-year check.
Beneish M-Score
M = -1.84An eight-variable model built to detect earnings manipulation, and built to run on exactly two consecutive years — which is what a prospectus gives us. It belongs here more than anywhere: a company about to list has the maximum possible incentive to have dressed up the very years it is about to show you. A score above −1.78 is the threshold at which the model says the accounts merit a closer look. It is a screening signal, not an accusation, and it was calibrated on listed companies elsewhere. Read the eight components, not just the total.
| Component | Value | What it captures |
|---|---|---|
| DSRI Days Sales in Receivables Index (Receivables_t / Sales_t) / (Receivables_t-1 / Sales_t-1) | 0.947 | Above 1 means receivables grew faster than sales. Revenue may be being recognised ahead of collection. |
| GMI Gross Margin Index GrossMargin_t-1 / GrossMargin_t | 1.126 | Above 1 means margins deteriorated. A firm with worsening prospects has more incentive to manipulate. |
| AQI Asset Quality Index AQ_t / AQ_t-1, where AQ = 1 - (CurrentAssets + PPE) / TotalAssets | 0.131 | Above 1 means a rising share of assets is soft (neither current nor fixed) — capitalised costs can hide here. |
| SGI Sales Growth Index Sales_t / Sales_t-1 | 1.42 | Growth is not manipulation. But high-growth firms face more pressure to keep the streak going. |
| DEPI Depreciation Index DepRate_t-1 / DepRate_t, where DepRate = Dep / (Dep + PPE) | 0.661 | Above 1 means assets are being depreciated more slowly — a quiet way to lift reported profit. |
| SGAI SG&A Index (SGA_t / Sales_t) / (SGA_t-1 / Sales_t-1), SGA proxied as employee cost + other expenses | 0.976 | A proxy, because filings rarely break out SG&A cleanly. Read it as a direction, not a precise figure. |
| LVGI Leverage Index Leverage_t / Leverage_t-1, where Leverage = (CurrentLiab + LongTermDebt) / TotalAssets | 1.034 | Above 1 means leverage rose. Debt covenants create pressure to hit numbers. |
| TATA Total Accruals to Total Assets (PAT - CashFromOperations) / TotalAssets | 0.1381 | The gap between reported profit and cash generated. The single heaviest term in the model — and the one that catches profit that never became cash. |
M = -1.84, below the −1.78 threshold. The model does not flag these accounts.
Altman Z″-Score (emerging markets)
Z″ = 7.19 · SafeA distress-prediction model. We use the Z″ variant deliberately: the original Z was calibrated on American manufacturers and misleads badly on Indian services companies. Above 2.6 is the safe zone, 1.1 to 2.6 is grey, below 1.1 is the distress zone. Like every model of its kind it is a screen, not a prophecy.
| X1 — Working Capital / Total Assets | 0.137 |
| X2 — Retained Earnings / Total Assets | 0.389 |
| X3 — EBIT / Total Assets | 0.158 |
| X4 — Net Worth / Total Liabilities | 0.684 |
| Z″ = 3.25 + 6.56·X1 + 3.26·X2 + 6.72·X3 + 1.05·X4 | 7.19 |
Piotroski F-Score (adapted)
4 / 8Nine yes-or-no tests of fundamental strength — except we run eight. One of the original nine asks whether the company issued new shares, which is plainly absurd to ask of a company whose entire purpose at this moment is to issue shares. We drop that test, and we would rather tell you that than quietly fudge it.
- ✓Positive return on assets
- ✗Positive operating cash flow
- ✗Return on assets improving
- ✗Cash flow exceeds profit (quality of earnings)
- ✓Long-term leverage decreasing
- ✓Current ratio improving
- ✗Gross margin improving
- ✓Asset turnover improving
The Final-Year Check
oursNot from any textbook. The hockey stick in the last year before a filing is the oldest pattern in this business, and nobody publishes it. So we measure it: how the final disclosed year compares with the years behind it. Real acceleration looks exactly the same on the page as a flattering one — which is precisely why it is worth naming rather than assuming either way.
- Cash conversion fell sharply in the final year: operating cash flow was -0.5x profit in FY26, against -0.18x in FY25. Profit rose; the cash behind it did not follow at the same rate.
Ratios Nobody Prints
- Contingent liabilities / Net worth: 47.2%
Contingent liabilities of 111.41 cr against a net worth of 235.84 cr — 47.2% of what the company is worth on paper. These are obligations that sit off the balance sheet but could land on it. What they consist of matters as much as the size: a corporate guarantee to a subsidiary is a different animal from a disputed tax demand, and the filing says which. - Related-party revenue / Total revenue: 0%
0% of revenue in FY26 came from entities connected to the promoters. Revenue you sell to yourself is not the same as revenue you won in the market. - Cash / Short-term borrowings: 0.06x
Short-term borrowings of 198.46 cr against cash of 12.89 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is only comfortable while lenders stay comfortable. - Promoter remuneration / PAT: 4.1%
Managerial remuneration to the promoter group was 2.19 cr against a profit of 53.56 cr. This is a legitimate cost — but it is also a route by which value leaves a company before it ever reaches a minority shareholder.
The Formula NotebookEvery number above, with the working shown. Check us.
Every number we publish, with the working shown. The formula, the same formula with this company’s actual figures put into it, the answer, and what it is for. Check us. That is the point.
PAT ÷ Net Worth53.56 ÷ 235.84What the company earned on the money shareholders have in it. The headline measure of return — and the one the DuPont section takes apart.
EBIT ÷ (Net Worth + Total Borrowings)91.70 ÷ (235.84 + 234.19) = 91.70 ÷ 470.03Return on ALL the capital in the business, borrowed as well as owned. Unlike ROE, it cannot be flattered by taking on debt.
EBITDA ÷ Revenue106.42 ÷ 1,171.65Operating profitability before the effects of debt, tax and depreciation. What the business earns from the act of trading.
Total Borrowings ÷ Net Worth234.19 ÷ 235.84How much the company has borrowed against what it owns. High is not automatically bad — ask whether the borrowing is being serviced comfortably.
EBIT ÷ Finance Cost91.70 ÷ 19.10How many times over operating profit covers the interest bill. Below about 2x, a meaningful share of what the business earns is going to lenders rather than owners.
(Trade Receivables ÷ Revenue) × 365(218.12 ÷ 1,171.65) × 365How long the company waits to be paid. Rising receivable days mean revenue is being booked faster than it is collected — which is where a great many accounting problems begin.
Inventory Days + Receivable Days − Payable Days35 + 68 − 30How long cash is tied up in the operating cycle before it comes back. The longer it is, the more working capital the business must fund.
Cash from Operations ÷ PAT-26.64 ÷ 53.56Did the profit turn into cash? Profit is an opinion; cash is a fact. When this sits well below 1x for long, the two are drifting apart, and the filing is where you find out why.
(PAT − Cash from Operations) ÷ Total Assets(53.56 − -26.64) ÷ 580.79 = 80.20 ÷ 580.79The share of reported profit that exists on paper rather than in the bank. It is also the heaviest single term in the Beneish model, for good reason.
Price × Post-issue Shares₹272.00 × 101,631,879 sharesWhat the whole company is being valued at, if the issue prices at the top of the band.
Market Cap + Total Borrowings − Cash2,764.39 + 234.19 − 12.89What it would actually cost to buy the whole business: you take on its debt and you get its cash. This is the number a buyer cares about, and it is the reason a P/E on its own can mislead.
Enterprise Value ÷ EBITDA2,985.69 ÷ 106.42The multiple that includes debt. Two companies on the same P/E — one debt-free, one heavily borrowed — are not the same investment, and only this number tells you so.
Market Cap ÷ PAT2,764.39 ÷ 53.56The familiar multiple. Useful, but blind to debt — read it alongside EV/EBITDA, never instead of it.
Offer price ÷ weighted average cost of acquisitionAcquired at nil or near-nil considerationEvery offer document must disclose the weighted average cost of acquisition for shares issued or transferred over the preceding one, eighteen and thirty-six months. Here the entry price is nil, which means a bonus issue or a transfer for no consideration. A multiple cannot be computed against zero, and that is the fact worth noticing rather than a number to print. What it means is yours to decide; the arithmetic is the filing’s own.
EBIT × (1 − tax rate) ÷ (Net Worth + Debt − Cash)NOPAT ÷ Invested CapitalWhat the business earns on the capital actually at work in it. We do not compare this to a cost of capital: that would need a beta, an unlisted company has none, and inventing one would be theatre.
P/E ÷ trailing PAT growth (%)51.61 ÷ 0.5%PEG was designed for FORWARD growth. This one uses TRAILING growth, because that is all a prospectus gives us — and the final year before an IPO is very often the best year the company will have for a while. A low PEG here may say more about the timing of the filing than about the price. We show it because it was asked for; we show the growth denominator beside it so it cannot mislead you quietly.
Workspace
The post-issue share count is stated as “[•]” in this filing until final pricing, so we derive it: profit after tax divided by earnings per share gives the pre-issue count, and the fresh issue divided by the offer price gives the new shares. Everything below rests on that derivation. It is close, not exact.
The numbers are already loaded. Move the offer price and watch every multiple move with it. Set your own growth and margin and see what they imply two years out. These are your assumptions, not our forecast — we have no view on what this company will earn, and the moment we published one we would be doing something we are not registered to do. What we can do is put the arithmetic in front of you and get out of the way.
Price defaults to the top of the band. Margin defaults to what the company actually reported in FY26.
Projections are arithmetic on the inputs you typed. They are not a forecast, not a recommendation, and not a view on whether this offer is worth taking. Educational only.
Institutional Alpha: DRHP Deep Dive
According to the 1Lattice Report, the Indian wires and cables industry is driven by rapid digital infrastructure expansion, 5G rollouts, rising data consumption, and government initiatives like BharatNet. Within broadband cables, the Indian networking cables market was valued at ₹ 3590.00 crore in FY26 and is projected to expand at an 18.7% CAGR to reach ₹ 8450.00 crore by FY31, making it the fastest-growing sub-segment. Furthermore, the Indian fibre-optic cable market is expected to grow from ₹ 10500.00 crore in FY26 to ₹ 23310.00 crore by FY31 at a 17.3% CAGR. Orient Cables is positioned among India's top players in networking cables with a 22.9% market share in FY26.
Execution Track Record Driven by Rapid Capacity Expansion
Orient Cables expanded cable manufacturing capacity from 539,660 kms in FY24 to 794,976 kms in FY26 across Unit I and Unit II in Bhiwadi, while commissioning a new Unit III facility in Bengaluru in May 2026. This capacity expansion supported a 33.46% revenue CAGR between FY24 and FY26.
Source: p.24, p.38, p.206Competitive Position via Backward Integration and Import Substitution
Orient Cables is an early mover in manufacturing passive networking accessories like keystone jacks and E-beam irradiated solar cables in India. In-house compounding, testing laboratories, and price competitiveness relative to Chinese imports position the company as a key domestic partner for telecom majors.
Source: p.171, p.199, p.206Future Planning Focused on De-leveraging and Specialty Cable Verticals
Out of the ₹ 320.00 crore fresh issue proceeds, Orient Cables allocates ₹ 155.50 crore toward debt repayment, reducing finance costs, and ₹ 91.50 crore toward E-beam machinery and civil works in Bhiwadi to expand high-margin solar, EV, and defense cable product lines.
Source: p.118, p.119, p.226Shareholding, Syndicate & Leadership
Leadership & Skin in the Game
Leadership: Vipul Nagpal
Litigation: ₹ 2.04 crore material civil litigation filed by Orient Electric Limited against the Company (including ₹ 2.00 crore damages claim), ₹ 22.80 crore criminal Section 138 complaint filed by CEO Vipul Nagpal against Shakthi Sona Solar Electric, and ₹ 2.00 crore civil proceeding filed against TDT Copper.
Auditor / RPT Flags: Auditors noted CARO reporting observations across FY24-FY26 regarding discrepancies between quarterly stock and receivable statements filed with consortium banks versus financial books, alongside delayed registration of vehicle loan charges with ROC.
Peers & Valuation
| Company | P/E | P/B | RoE | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR Kabel Limited | 54.85 | — | 20.83 | 5.1 |
| Polycab India Limited | 46.69 | — | 24.58 | 9.4 |
| Finolex Cables Limited | 26.29 | — | 12.33 | 11.3 |
| KEI Industries Limited | 69.31 | — | 14.75 | 7.82 |
| Havells India Limited | 78.42 | — | — | 7.5 |
At the ₹272 upper band, the issue is priced at 51.6x earnings — a 6% discount to the peer median of 54.9x. This is the arithmetic of the price band against the peers the filing itself lists; it is not a view on whether the offer is worth taking.
Plant Vitals
The operating metrics that actually price this business — the ones a generic IPO page skips. Straight from the filing.
| Metric | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Installed cable capacity | 895,776 kms | annualised capacity across 3 manufacturing units as of June 30, 2026 (794,976 kms in FY26) |
| Capacity utilisation % | 69.85% | overall cable capacity utilisation in FY26 (71.04% in Q1 FY27) |
| Manufacturing facilities | 3 units | Unit I & II in Bhiwadi (Rajasthan), Unit III in Bengaluru (Karnataka) |
| Top 10 customer concentration | 76.52% | share of FY26 revenue from operations (25.75% from largest customer) |
| Product mix (Networking Cables) | 78.23% | share of FY26 revenue from operations (Specialty Power & OFC: 21.37%) |
| Top 10 supplier concentration | 69.71% | share of total raw materials sourced in FY26 (74.91% in Q1 FY27) |
| Import content % | 7.62% | raw material imported as % of total purchases in FY26 (6.35% in Q1 FY27) |
Source: p.20, p.25, p.217, p.241, p.371, p.373 — Business / MD&A
🔍 Forensic Findings — What the Footnotes Say
Findings from across the filing — the notes, MD&A, related-party disclosures, contingent liabilities, CARO and litigation, alongside the risk section itself. Each carries where it was found, so you can see which were buried and which were disclosed. Findings marked derived are computed from the filed numbers against a stated rule, shown beside them.
Orient Cables is involved in cross-litigation with Orient Electric Limited regarding the trademark 'ORIENT CABLES' and corporate name, with Orient Electric filing a counter civil suit seeking a permanent injunction and ₹ 2.00 crore in damages.
p.44, p.404Statutory auditor CARO reports noted material variances between quarterly inventory and receivables statements submitted to lending banks (HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Citi Bank) and internal books of accounts during FY24, FY25, and FY26.
p.42, p.355Orient Cables incurred negative operating cash flow of ₹ -2.66 crore in Fiscal 2026 (compared to ₹ -0.98 crore in FY25 and ₹ 4.22 crore in FY24) as cash was absorbed into trade receivables (₹ 21.81 crore) and inventories (₹ 11.26 crore).
p.24, p.300Promoter entity Orient Networks Private Limited is authorized by its MOA to engage in cable manufacturing, but maintains no active business operations and executed a Non-Compete Agreement dated June 20, 2025.
p.43, p.289The offer consists of a Fresh Issue of ₹ 320.00 crore for capital expenditure and debt repayment alongside an Offer for Sale of ₹ 232.00 crore by Promoter Selling Shareholders.
p.1, p.84, p.118₹ 2.04 crore material civil litigation filed by Orient Electric Limited against the Company (including ₹ 2.00 crore damages claim), ₹ 22.80 crore criminal Section 138 complaint filed by CEO Vipul Nagpal against Shakthi Sona Solar Electric, and ₹ 2.00 crore civil proceeding filed against TDT Copper.
p.2, p.42, p.44, p.88, p.98, p.153, p.355Auditors noted CARO reporting observations across FY24-FY26 regarding discrepancies between quarterly stock and receivable statements filed with consortium banks versus financial books, alongside delayed registration of vehicle loan charges with ROC.
p.2, p.42, p.44, p.88, p.98, p.153, p.355Operating cash flow was negative ₹26.64 cr in FY26 while the company reported a profit after tax of ₹53.56 cr. Profit that does not arrive as cash has to be funded from somewhere else.
rule: CFO<0 & PAT>0Short-term borrowings of ₹198.46 cr against cash of ₹12.89 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is comfortable only while lenders stay comfortable.
rule: cash < 0.5x short-term debtCompany's Claims vs Reality
We stress-test each claim against the filing's own data.
1Lattice Report confirms Orient Cables generated ₹ 823.00 crore in domestic networking cable sales in FY26, accounting for ~22.9% of the ₹ 3,590.00 crore Indian networking cables market.
p.156, p.171Restated consolidated financial statements show an ROE of 25.84% and ROCE of 23.82% in FY26, outperforming peer set median ROE (Polycab 24.58%, RR Kabel 20.83%, Finolex 12.33%).
p.138, p.206Statutory auditor CARO report noted discrepancies between quarterly inventory and trade receivable statements filed with lending banks and internal books of accounts across FY24-FY26.
p.42, p.355Proprietary SWOT — Company-Specific
Strengths
- Top four player in the Indian networking cables market with ~22.9% market share in FY26 and nearly two decades of operating track record.
- Integrated manufacturing infrastructure across Bhiwadi and Bengaluru with an annual installed capacity of 895,776 kms of cables.
- Comprehensive global product certifications (UL, ETL, CPR, RDSO, TSEC) enabling export footprint across 14 countries.
Weaknesses
- Negative cash flows from operations in FY26 (₹ -2.66 crore) driven by working capital lock-up in inventories and trade receivables.
- Supplier concentration with top 10 raw material suppliers accounting for ~70% of total procurements in FY26.
Opportunities
- Expanding Indian networking cables market projected to grow at an 18.7% CAGR to reach ₹ 8,450.00 crore by FY31.
- Product portfolio expansion into high-margin verticals including E-beam solar cables, EV charging cable assemblies, and keystone jacks.
Threats (material, not boilerplate)
- Raw material price volatility in copper, aluminum, and crude oil-linked polymer compounds. risk_section
Why it matters: Input cost spikes squeeze manufacturing margins if price increases cannot be immediately passed on through customer contracts. - Injunction risks and operational disruptions from ongoing trademark and corporate name litigation with Orient Electric Limited. risk_section
Why it matters: An adverse court ruling could force a complete corporate rebrand, disrupting B2B customer relationships and eroding brand equity.
Live Subscription Status
Allotment Status
Check your allotment on the registrar's portal → Registrar: KFin Technologies
Allotment is decided by the registrar, not by us and not by the exchange. In an oversubscribed retail book, allotment is by lottery, so a large application does not improve your odds beyond one lot. If money stays blocked after the refund date, the mandate expiry (10 Nov 2026) is the date to raise with your bank.
Analyst Q&A: Burning Questions
Facts from the filing. No recommendation — that layer arrives once our Research Analyst registration is live.
How will the ₹ 320.00 crore fresh issue proceeds be deployed to strengthen the business?
Orient Cables will allocate ₹ 155.50 crore to prepay or repay outstanding bank borrowings (reducing annual interest expense), ₹ 91.50 crore to fund capital expenditure for new machinery and civil works at Bhiwadi facilities, and the remaining balance for general corporate purposes.
p.118, p.119What is Orient Cables' supplier and customer concentration profile?
Top 10 raw material suppliers account for ~70% of total procurements in FY26. On the customer side, Orient Cables maintains long-term relationships averaging over 9 years with top clients, catering to 2 of India's top 3 telecom companies by revenue.
p.151, p.205, p.209What factors influenced the moderation in EBITDA margin from 10.17% in FY25 to 8.23% in FY26?
EBITDA margin moderated in FY26 primarily due to raw material input price inflation, higher power and fuel expenses associated with expanded plant capacity, and ESOP expenses of ₹ 1.52 crore, partially offset by operating leverage from higher sales volume.
p.138, p.393, p.394What is the status and financial risk of the trademark suit involving Orient Electric Limited?
Orient Electric filed a counter civil suit seeking a permanent injunction against the use of the mark 'ORIENT' and ₹ 2.00 crore in damages. Both parties are currently engaged in settlement discussions while the suit remains pending before the Delhi High Court.
p.44, p.404What Earlier Investors Paid
Early capital takes real risk and is fairly rewarded for it — a large multiple built over many years is normal. What deserves a closer look is a steep step-up in a short window: a round priced cheaply only months before the offer.
| Shareholder | Priced at | When | vs IPO price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vipul Nagpal | ₹10.00 | 2005-09-15 | 27.2x |
| An early round from roughly 21 years ago, at roughly 27.2x the offer price. A multiple of that size built over that long reflects the risk taken and the time elapsed. That is the normal reward for early capital, not a red flag. | |||
| Vipul Nagpal | ₹10.00 | 2006-03-30 | 27.2x |
| An early round from roughly 21 years ago, at roughly 27.2x the offer price. A multiple of that size built over that long reflects the risk taken and the time elapsed. That is the normal reward for early capital, not a red flag. | |||
| Garima Nagpal | — | 2024-11-21 | — |
| Sub-division of shares (1:10) | — | 2024-12-17 | — |
| Bonus Issue (9:1) | — | 2025-01-06 | — |
Prices are as stated in the filing’s allotment history and are not adjusted for later bonus issues or share splits. Where a company has issued bonus shares, the multiples above understate the true return and can even read as losses. Adjusting for that is on our list; until it is done we would rather show the raw disclosure and tell you its limits than publish a confident number that is wrong.
Lock-in Expiry Calendar
Shares held before the IPO cannot be sold immediately; they unlock in tranches. When a tranche unlocks, more shares become eligible to trade. Retail investors are frequently caught unaware by these dates. The schedule below follows from the listing date; quantities are shown only where the filing discloses them.
- 05 Oct 2029Minimum Promoters' Contribution3 years
- 05 Oct 2027Promoters' Shareholding in Excess of Minimum Contribution1 year
- 04 Nov 2026Anchor Investor Portion (50%)30 days
- 03 Jan 2027Anchor Investor Portion (50%)90 days
An unlock means more shares may be sold — not that they will be, and not that the price will move. We state the dates; what you do with them is your call.
What Changed Between the DRHP and the RHP
Companies file a draft prospectus, then a final one. The changes in between are rarely reported, and they can be revealing.
| Item | In the DRHP | In the RHP / Addendum |
|---|---|---|
| Reporting Period Restated financial statements were updated in the RHP to incorporate audited consolidated results for Fiscal 2026 and the three-month period ended June 30, 2026, dropping Fiscal 2023. | Fiscals 2025, 2024, and 2023 | Three month period ended June 30, 2026, and Fiscals 2026, 2025, and 2024 |
| Restated Financials Restated financial information was updated to include full Fiscal 2026 audited consolidated performance, showing Total Income expanding to ₹ 1181.67 crore and Restated PAT reaching ₹ 53.56 crore. | FY25 Total Income of ₹ 831.86 crore, Restated PAT of ₹ 53.32 crore | FY26 Total Income of ₹ 1181.67 crore, Restated PAT of ₹ 53.56 crore |
| Contingent Liabilities Outstanding contingent liabilities expanded from ₹ 104.78 crore as of March 31, 2025 in DRHP to ₹ 111.41 crore as of March 31, 2026 in RHP to support higher working capital facility limits. | ₹ 104.78 crore in bank guarantees and letters of credit (as of March 31, 2025) | ₹ 111.41 crore in bank guarantees and letters of credit (as of March 31, 2026) and ₹ 103.43 crore (as of June 30, 2026) |
| Litigation Litigation materiality threshold was updated to ₹ 2.45 crore in RHP based on 2% of FY26 net worth, and disclosures were updated to reflect settlement discussions and adjournments in Orient Electric trademark proceedings. | Materiality threshold of ₹ 1.07 crore (5% of 3-year average PAT); ongoing trademark dispute with Orient Electric | Materiality threshold of ₹ 2.45 crore (2% of Net Worth); updated disclosures on Orient Electric trademark suit and Section 16 MCA application reflecting ongoing settlement talks |
| Risk Factors Risk factors expanded from 66 in DRHP to 69 in RHP, incorporating additional disclosures on physical server backup audit observations, trademark settlement negotiations, and Q1 FY27 performance. | 66 total risk factors disclosed in DRHP | 69 total risk factors disclosed in RHP |
Educational, grounded entirely in the company's filings (DRHP/RHP). Not investment advice. FinMinutes does not provide buy/sell recommendations.