Swastika Infra
FinMinutes Deep Business Model & Edge
Swastika Infra Limited is an Indian engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) company specializing in power distribution infrastructure projects for state electricity utilities across India. Converted from a partnership firm originally established in 1969, the company provides turnkey solutions including feeder segregation, underground cabling, GIS substations, and street lighting systems.
What this company actually does — full breakdown ▾
Swastika Infra Limited is an Indian engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) company specializing in power transmission and distribution (T&D) infrastructure projects on a turnkey basis. Its core service offerings cover survey, design, engineering, procurement, erection, testing, and commissioning of power distribution networks, including 11 KV feeder segregation, overhead-to-underground cabling conversion, Gas Insulated Switchgear (GIS) substations, distribution transformers, and LED street lighting systems, alongside a minor trading presence in power cables. The company primarily serves state electricity distribution companies (DISCOMs) and government utilities, including West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, Assam Power Distribution Company Limited, Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited, Goa Electricity Department, Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, and Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, with government projects contributing 96.87% of Fiscal 2026 revenue from operations. Geographically, Swastika Infra operates across nine Indian states, with Himachal Pradesh, West Bengal, Rajasthan, and Gujarat collectively accounting for 86.81% of Fiscal 2026 revenue from operations. The company operates an asset-light business model, assigning erection work to third-party sub-contractors while procuring bulk electrical equipment—such as cables, transformers, and ring main units—from domestic suppliers without long-term contracts. In terms of scale, the company achieved total income of ₹ 505.57 crore in Fiscal 2026 and maintained an order book of ₹ 916.55 crore as of July 31, 2026.
- EPC Power Projects — Turnkey supply, erection, testing, and commissioning of power distribution infrastructure, substations, underground cabling, and solar park power evacuation systems.
- Sale of Products — Trading of electrical items and accessories, primarily power cables and circuit breakers.
Proven 15-year execution track record in power distribution EPC with 36 completed projects and 18,579.47 KM of lines laid, robust order book of ₹ 916.55 crore offering multi-year revenue visibility, asset-light business model achieving a fixed asset turnover ratio of 70.72x in Fiscal 2026, and strong pre-qualification credentials with state DISCOMs.
The Offer
Follow the Money — Use of Proceeds
- Funding incremental working capital requirements of our Company — ₹90.00 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) | 503.57 | 350.76 | 209.58 |
| Net Profit (₹ Cr) | 41.43 | 27.45 | 13.98 |
| PAT Margin | 8.23% | 7.83% | 6.67% |
Revenue Breakdown
- EPC Power Projects: 96.87%
- Sale of Products: 3.13%
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.
The market is bidding this issue enthusiastically. The headline financials look strong, but our forensic read of the filing is not clean — the risk band is high and the footnotes carry material flags. That gap is the fact worth noticing. Strong demand is information about the market; the flags are information about the company, and the two are not saying the same thing here. Read the Forensic Findings below before the momentum decides it for you.
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) | ↑ 43.6% | Revenue grew significantly due to an increase in the volume and value of EPC power distribution contracts executed during the fiscal year. | Structural |
| Cost of Material Consumed (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 42.2% | Cost of material consumed increased proportionately in line with the higher execution scale of EPC power projects. | Structural |
| Other Expenses (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 42.3% | Other expenses increased primarily due to higher site execution costs, legal and professional fees, travelling expenses, and rent for temporary project offices. | Structural |
| Finance Cost (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 106.6% | Finance costs doubled due to higher working capital credit utilisation and increased bank charges and commissions for non-fund-based bank guarantee and letter of credit facilities. | Structural |
| Operating Profit (EBITDA) (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 61.3% | Operating profit expanded significantly due to top-line growth and a 155 bps expansion in EBITDA margins resulting from operational efficiencies in project execution. | Structural |
| Profit After Tax (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 51.0% | Net profit expanded by over 50% driven by higher revenue execution and improved operating margins across ongoing EPC power projects. | Structural |
| Operating Cash Flow (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 87.4% | Operating cash flow deficit narrowed substantially due to higher operating profitability before working capital changes. | Cyclical |
| Revenue from Operations (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 67.4% | Revenue increased sharply due to an 80% growth in EPC power project execution across state electricity distribution utilities. | Structural |
| Cost of Material Consumed (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 73.3% | Material costs increased in tandem with the substantial expansion in EPC project execution and procurement. | Structural |
| Employee Benefits Expenses (FY25 vs FY24) | ↓ 17.2% | Employee benefit expenses declined primarily due to reductions in managerial remuneration paid to directors and senior personnel. | Structural |
| Other Expenses (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 54.1% | Other expenses increased due to higher site operational costs, legal and professional fees, rent, and commission and brokerage expenses. | Structural |
| Finance Cost (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 35.7% | Finance costs rose due to increased working capital loans and higher bank guarantee and letter of credit charges. | Structural |
| Profit After Tax (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 96.3% | Net profit nearly doubled as revenue expanded by 67.37% and EBITDA margins improved by 119 basis points. | Structural |
| Trade Receivables (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 126.9% | Trade receivables expanded significantly due to higher overall revenue scale and concentrated billing during the fourth quarter of Fiscal 2025. | Cyclical |
| Total Borrowings (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 153.4% | Borrowings increased to finance working capital requirements, supplier finance arrangements (TReDS), and margin money for bank guarantees. | Structural |
| Operating Cash Flow (FY25 vs FY24) | ↓ 2,189.8% | Operating cash outflow expanded due to heavy working capital lock-up in trade receivables, unbilled contract revenue, retention money, and bank guarantee margin deposits. | Cyclical |
Headwinds
- Revenue Concentration in State Electricity Utilities (DISCOMs) sector persistent
Deriving 96.87% of FY26 revenue from government utilities exposes operations to potential contract renegotiations, delayed milestone payments, and budgetary reallocations. - Raw Material and Electrical Equipment Price Volatility sector persistent
Fluctuations in domestic prices of power cables, transformers, and switchgear components directly impact project margins where contracts lack price escalation provisions. - Monsoon Seasonality Disruption sector temporary
Work execution slows down during the monsoon season due to weather-related site constraints, leading to uneven quarterly revenue recognition.
Tailwinds
- Government Outlays under Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS) macro
Government allocation of ₹ 3.03 lakh crore under RDSS for loss reduction, feeder segregation, and grid modernization drives sustained demand for distribution EPC tenders. - Expanding Renewable Energy Grid Evacuation Infrastructure sector
Rapid expansion in solar power capacity and large solar park developments create growing opportunities for high-voltage transmission lines and evacuation substations.
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 initiated2026-09-29
- Pre Application Start2026-09-21
- Bidding Start2026-09-23
- Bidding End2026-09-25
- Allotment Process Start2026-09-28
- Allotment Finalization2026-09-29
- Listing Day2026-09-30
- Mandate End2026-11-06
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 | 503.57 | 350.76 | 209.58 |
| Other Income | 2.00 | 1.85 | 1.76 |
| Total Income | 505.57 | 352.60 | 211.33 |
| Cost of Materials Consumed | 379.46 | 274.20 | 139.94 |
| Purchases of Stock-in-Trade | 14.47 | 10.59 | 20.25 |
| Changes in Inventories | 4.77 | -4.44 | 1.59 |
| Employee Benefit Expense | 13.77 | 12.24 | 14.79 |
| Finance Cost | 16.90 | 8.18 | 6.03 |
| Depreciation & Amortisation | 0.64 | 0.58 | 0.67 |
| Other Expenses | 20.24 | 14.22 | 9.23 |
| Total Expenses | 450.23 | 315.58 | 192.50 |
| Profit Before Exceptional Items and Tax | 55.34 | 37.02 | 18.83 |
| Exceptional Items | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Profit Before Tax | 55.34 | 37.02 | 18.83 |
| Tax Expense | 13.91 | 9.57 | 4.85 |
| Profit After Tax | 41.43 | 27.45 | 13.98 |
| Other Comprehensive Income | -0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Total Comprehensive Income | 41.42 | 27.45 | 13.98 |
| EPS - Basic | 15.70 | 11.09 | 5.65 |
| EPS - Diluted | 15.70 | 11.09 | 5.65 |
Balance SheetWhat the company owns, owes, and is worth on paper.
| Balance Sheet (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Share Capital | 27.17 | 24.75 | 24.75 |
| Reserves & Surplus | 129.60 | 52.27 | 24.82 |
| Net Worth | 156.78 | 77.02 | 49.57 |
| Long-term Borrowings | 2.55 | 0.22 | 0.37 |
| Short-term Borrowings | 112.09 | 110.79 | 43.45 |
| Total Borrowings | 114.64 | 111.02 | 43.82 |
| Trade Payables | 99.00 | 53.42 | 26.48 |
| Current Liabilities | 251.97 | 180.69 | 92.72 |
| Total Liabilities | 255.46 | 181.52 | 93.69 |
| Property, Plant & Equipment | 7.12 | 2.28 | 2.66 |
| Capital Work in Progress | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Intangible Assets | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.02 |
| Investments | 0.46 | 0.35 | 0.27 |
| Inventories | 8.15 | 12.91 | 8.48 |
| Trade Receivables | 114.98 | 71.31 | 31.43 |
| Cash & Equivalents | 1.67 | 0.51 | 2.19 |
| Current Assets | 391.18 | 251.23 | 136.71 |
| Total Assets | 412.24 | 258.54 | 143.26 |
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 | -9.65 | -76.54 | -3.34 |
| Capital Expenditure | 5.57 | 0.60 | 0.99 |
| Net Cash from Investing Activities | -16.33 | 14.15 | -22.74 |
| Net Cash from Financing Activities | 27.14 | 60.70 | 16.50 |
| Net Change in Cash | 1.16 | -1.68 | -9.58 |
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 (%) | 14.4 | 13 | 12.1 |
| EBIT Margin (%) | 14.3 | 12.8 | 11.8 |
| PAT Margin (%) | 8.2 | 7.8 | 6.7 |
| Return on Equity (%) | 26.4 | 35.6 | 28.2 |
| Return on Capital Employed (%) | 26.6 | 24 | 26.6 |
| Return on Assets (%) | 10 | 10.6 | 9.8 |
| Leverage | |||
| Debt / Equity (x) | 0.73 | 1.44 | 0.88 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA (x) | 1.55 | 2.41 | 1.63 |
| Interest Coverage (x) | 4.27 | 5.53 | 4.12 |
| Liquidity | |||
| Current Ratio (x) | 1.55 | 1.39 | 1.47 |
| Quick Ratio (x) | 1.52 | 1.32 | 1.38 |
| Efficiency | |||
| Asset Turnover (x) | 1.22 | 1.36 | 1.46 |
| Receivable Days | 83 | 74 | 55 |
| Inventory Days | 7 | 17 | 19 |
| Payable Days | 91 | 70 | 60 |
| Cash Conversion Cycle (days) | -1 | 21 | 14 |
| Quality of Earnings | |||
| Operating Cash Flow / PAT (x) | -0.23 | -2.79 | -0.24 |
| Accruals Ratio (%) | 12.4 | 40.2 | 12.1 |
| Capex / Depreciation (x) | 8.7 | 1.03 | 1.48 |
| Inventory and payable days are measured against cost of goods (materials consumed + purchases of stock-in-trade + change in inventories). Receivable days against revenue. | |||
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) | 8.2% | 7.8% | 6.7% |
| Asset Turnover (Revenue / Assets) | 1.22x | 1.36x | 1.46x |
| Equity Multiplier (Assets / Net Worth) | 2.63x | 3.36x | 2.89x |
| = Return on Equity | 26.4% | 35.6% | 28.2% |
| Tax Burden (PAT / PBT) | 0.75x | 0.74x | 0.74x |
| Interest Burden (PBT / EBIT) | 0.77x | 0.82x | 0.76x |
| Operating Margin (EBIT / Revenue) | 14.3% | 12.9% | 11.9% |
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 41.43 cr while operating cash flow was NEGATIVE at -9.65 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.
- Receivable days rose from 55 in FY24 to 83 in FY26. The company is booking revenue faster than it is collecting it, which ties up cash and raises the question of who is not paying.
Forensic ModelsBeneish, Altman, Piotroski and the Montier C-score — plus our own final-year check.
Beneish M-Score
7 of 8 inputsAn 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) | 1.123 | 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 | 0.886 | 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 | — | 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 | 1.436 | 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) | 2.459 | 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 | 0.895 | 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 | 0.882 | Above 1 means leverage rose. Debt covenants create pressure to hit numbers. |
| TATA Total Accruals to Total Assets (PAT - CashFromOperations) / TotalAssets | 0.1239 | 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. |
The filing does not disclose every input the model needs, so we withhold the composite score rather than substitute a guess. The components we could compute are above.
Altman Z″-Score (emerging markets)
Z″ = 8.31 · 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 | 0.338 |
| X2 — Reserves / Total Assets | 0.314 |
| X3 — EBIT / Total Assets | 0.175 |
| X4 — Net Worth / Total Liabilities | 0.614 |
| Z″ = 3.25 + 6.56·X1 + 3.26·X2 + 6.72·X3 + 1.05·X4 | 8.31 |
X2 is meant to read retained earnings. The filing reports Other Equity, which also holds securities premium paid in by investors, so X2 here runs on reserves and reads higher than true retained earnings would. The more premium the company has raised before listing, the more Z″ is flattered.
Piotroski F-Score (adapted)
3 / 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
Montier C-Score
4 of 6 signsSix yes-or-no signs that reported profit may be running ahead of the business, from James Montier’s 2008 screen, read here for FY26 against FY25. Each is a direction in the statements, not a judgement. Several together are a reason to read the accounting policies and notes closely; none on its own means anything is wrong, and growing companies trip some of them honestly.
- ○Gap between profit and operating cash flow widening · PAT − CFO: ₹104.0 cr in FY25, ₹51.1 cr in FY26
- ●Receivable days rising · 74 days in FY25, 83 days in FY26
- ○Inventory days rising · 17 days in FY25, 7 days in FY26 (on cost of goods)
- ●Other current assets rising against revenue · 47.5% of revenue in FY25, 52.9% in FY26 (current assets less cash, receivables and inventory)
- ●Depreciation falling against fixed assets · 25.4% of net block in FY25, 9.0% in FY26
- ●Total assets growing more than 10% a year · 59.4% in FY26
Ratios Nobody Prints
- Contingent liabilities / Net worth: 173.9%
Contingent liabilities of 272.68 cr against a net worth of 156.78 cr — 173.9% 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: 0.01x
Short-term borrowings of 112.09 cr against cash of 1.67 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is only comfortable while lenders stay comfortable. - Promoter remuneration / PAT: 9%
Managerial remuneration to the promoter group was 3.73 cr against a profit of 41.43 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.
What the Price RequiresThe profit the offer price needs, at three hurdle rates. A restatement of the price, not a view on it.
At the upper band of ₹185.00, the market value is ₹488 cr. A buyer who wants a given return each year from a business that never grows needs annual profit of market value × that return. The three rates are round hurdle rates, not this company’s cost of capital, so pick the one that is yours. The years columns assume profit compounds from the FY26 figure and the price stands still. None of this is a forecast, a fair value or a target.
| Hurdle rate | Profit the price needs | × FY26 profit | Years at 15% growth | Years at 25% growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10% a year | ₹48.8 cr | 1.2x | 1.2 | 0.7 |
| 12% a year | ₹58.6 cr | 1.4x | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| 14% a year | ₹68.3 cr | 1.6x | 3.6 | 2.2 |
- Earnings yield at the upper band: 8.49% (FY26 profit ÷ market value).
- Free cash flow yield: -3.12% (operating cash flow less capital expenditure, −₹15.2 cr, ÷ market value).
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 Worth41.43 ÷ 156.78What 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)72.24 ÷ (156.78 + 114.64) = 72.24 ÷ 271.42Return on ALL the capital in the business, borrowed as well as owned. Unlike ROE, it cannot be flattered by taking on debt.
EBITDA ÷ Revenue72.88 ÷ 503.57Operating profitability before the effects of debt, tax and depreciation. What the business earns from the act of trading.
Total Borrowings ÷ Net Worth114.64 ÷ 156.78How much the company has borrowed against what it owns. High is not automatically bad — ask whether the borrowing is being serviced comfortably.
EBIT ÷ Finance Cost72.24 ÷ 16.90How 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(114.98 ÷ 503.57) × 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 Days7 + 83 − 91How 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-9.65 ÷ 41.43Did 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(41.43 − -9.65) ÷ 412.24 = 51.08 ÷ 412.24The 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₹185.00 × 26,388,535 sharesWhat the whole company is being valued at, if the issue prices at the top of the band.
Market Cap + Total Borrowings − Cash488.19 + 114.64 − 1.67What 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 ÷ EBITDA601.16 ÷ 72.88The 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 ÷ PAT488.19 ÷ 41.43The 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.
Latest full-year PAT ÷ market value₹41.43 cr ÷ ₹488.19 crThe P/E turned upside down: what each rupee of market value earns today. Set it against what you could earn elsewhere; the gap is what growth has to make up.
(Operating cash flow − capital expenditure) ÷ market value₹-15.22 cr ÷ ₹488.19 crCash left after the company pays for its own investment, against the price of the whole company. Profit can be shaped by accounting choices; this is harder to shape.
P/E ÷ trailing PAT growth (%)11.78 ÷ 50.9%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 Mordor Report, India's power transmission and distribution (T&D) sector is undergoing rapid expansion, driven by an expected 7.2% CAGR in national electricity demand between 2024 and 2030, alongside government initiatives like the Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS) allocating ₹ 3.03 lakh crore to reduce AT&C losses and modernize DISCOM networks. The Indian Power EPC market is expanding as state utilities invest heavily in feeder segregation, underground cabling, smart grids, and solar park power evacuation infrastructure. As an established power distribution EPC contractor operating an asset-light model across nine states, Swastika Infra Limited is positioned to leverage rising public sector grid modernization outlays and renewable energy integration.
Asset-Light Model Driving High Capital Efficiency
Swastika Infra operates an asset-light EPC model, subcontracting site erection and labor while retaining project management, engineering, and equipment procurement in-house. This structure allows the company to achieve an extraordinary fixed asset turnover ratio of 70.72x in FY26 and Return on Equity of 35.44%, while maintaining lean fixed overheads.
Source: p.121, p.125, p.197Capital Allocation Directed Toward Working Capital Scale-Up
The company is deploying ₹ 90.00 crore (69.77% of fresh issue proceeds) alongside ₹ 38.09 crore from Pre-IPO placement to fund incremental working capital requirements in FY27. This capital injection addresses the liquidity lock-up in trade receivables (83 days), retention money (120 days), and bank guarantee margin FDs required to execute its ₹ 916.55 crore order book.
Source: p.110, p.113, p.114High Off-Balance Sheet BG Dependency in State DISCOM Tenders
To bid for and execute public sector power distribution projects, Swastika Infra relies heavily on non-fund-based banking lines, with ₹ 272.68 crore of bank guarantees outstanding as of March 31, 2026. Managing non-fund credit limit approvals and margin money FDs remains essential to unlocking order book expansion under RDSS tenders.
Source: p.37, p.47, p.113Shareholding, Syndicate & Leadership
Leadership & Skin in the Game
Leadership: Vinay Gupta
Litigation: 2 material civil writ petitions filed by Company against State of Rajasthan / AVVNL / JVVNL (₹ 1.88 crore AVVNL CAG audit objection recovery and ₹ 3.60 crore JVVNL AG audit recovery dispute); 2 direct tax proceedings against Company (₹ 0.01 crore TDS TRACES demand); 2 indirect tax proceedings against Company (₹ 0.44 crore GST West Bengal demand); 4 direct tax proceedings against Promoters (₹ 2.24 crore Income Tax demands against Vinay Gupta and Vatsalya Gupta).
Auditor / RPT Flags: None; unmodified examination report on Restated Financial Information, though Note 44/45 and CARO noted minor GAAP to Ind AS restatement adjustments and statutory form filing delays.
Peers & Valuation
| Company | P/E | P/B | RoE | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rajesh Power Services Limited | 10.1 | — | 35.3 | 12.1 |
| Vikran Engineering Limited | 14.6 | — | 7.4 | 14 |
At the ₹185 upper band, the issue is priced at 11.8x earnings — a 4% discount to the peer median of 12.4x. 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.
Capacity Vitals
The operating metrics that actually price this business — the ones a generic IPO page skips. Straight from the filing.
| Metric | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Order book | ₹916.55 crore | as of July 31, 2026 across power distribution EPC contracts |
| Power distribution lines laid | 18,579.47 KM | cumulative distribution lines laid across 36 completed projects |
| Customer concentration | 96.87% | share of FY26 revenue derived from state electricity utilities (DISCOMs) |
| Government / DISCOM mix | 96.87% | share of FY26 revenue from public sector power distribution contracts |
| Bank guarantee liabilities | ₹272.68 crore | outstanding non-fund based performance and financial bank guarantees as of March 31, 2026 |
| Fixed asset turnover ratio | 70.72x | FY26 asset-light execution model efficiency ratio |
Source: p.38, p.113, p.121, p.197 — 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.
State electricity distribution companies (DISCOMs) generated 96.87% of consolidated revenue from operations in Fiscal 2026, with top 5 ongoing projects representing ₹ 403.48 crore (58.70% of total order book as of July 31, 2026).
p.28, p.30, p.197As of March 31, 2026, net current working capital stood at ₹ 255.63 crore (50.76% of annual revenue), absorbing liquidity across trade receivables (₹ 114.98 crore), retention money (₹ 160.02 crore), and unbilled contract assets (₹ 41.47 crore).
p.38, p.41, p.113, p.114Outstanding performance and financial bank guarantees issued to state utilities stood at ₹ 272.68 crore as of March 31, 2026 (7.18x PAT and 163.50x cash & cash equivalents), with ₹ 35.55 crore held in margin FDs.
p.47, p.48, p.79, p.308Company faces two active Civil Writ Petitions before the High Court of Rajasthan against AVVNL (₹ 1.88 crore CAG audit objection regarding price variation recovery) and JVVNL (₹ 3.60 crore AG audit objection regarding cable utilization).
p.28, p.48, p.348, p.349The public offer comprises a Fresh Issue of ₹ 129.00 crore alongside an Offer for Sale of 17,50,000 Equity Shares by Promoters and selling shareholders.
p.1, p.2, p.952 material civil writ petitions filed by Company against State of Rajasthan / AVVNL / JVVNL (₹ 1.88 crore AVVNL CAG audit objection recovery and ₹ 3.60 crore JVVNL AG audit recovery dispute); 2 direct tax proceedings against Company (₹ 0.01 crore TDS TRACES demand); 2 indirect tax proceedings against Company (₹ 0.44 crore GST West Bengal demand); 4 direct tax proceedings against Promoters (₹ 2.24 crore Income Tax demands against Vinay Gupta and Vatsalya Gupta).
p.2, p.47, p.88, p.104, p.347None; unmodified examination report on Restated Financial Information, though Note 44/45 and CARO noted minor GAAP to Ind AS restatement adjustments and statutory form filing delays.
p.2, p.47, p.88, p.104, p.347Operating cash flow was negative ₹9.65 cr in FY26 while the company reported a profit after tax of ₹41.43 cr. Profit that does not arrive as cash has to be funded from somewhere else.
rule: CFO<0 & PAT>0Short-term borrowings of ₹112.09 cr against cash of ₹1.67 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.
Filing and Mordor Report confirm FY26 total income of ₹ 505.57 crore, an active order book of ₹ 916.55 crore as of July 31, 2026, and a fixed asset turnover ratio of 70.72x reflecting sub-contracted erection work.
p.113, p.125, p.197Filing confirms completed and ongoing projects are backed by central funding schemes (RDSS) and World Bank assistance, though working capital remains strained by retention money and trade receivables.
p.182, p.197CARO disclosures and Risk Factors note past instances of delayed GST return filings, ESIC/PT deposit delays, and a pending ROC adjudication application for delayed CS appointment.
p.43, p.48, p.49Proprietary SWOT — Company-Specific
Strengths
- Established 15-year execution track record in power distribution EPC with 36 completed projects and 18,579.47 KM of lines laid.
- Strong order book of ₹ 916.55 crore as of July 31, 2026, offering multi-year revenue visibility across state DISCOMs.
- Asset-light business model achieving a fixed asset turnover ratio of 70.72x in Fiscal 2026.
Weaknesses
- Heavy customer concentration, with state electricity distribution utilities accounting for 96.87% of Fiscal 2026 revenue.
- High working capital intensity, with net working capital representing 50.76% of annual revenue from operations.
Opportunities
- Government outlays under the Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS) allocating ₹ 3.03 lakh crore for loss reduction and feeder segregation.
- Growing demand for underground cabling, GIS substations, and power evacuation infrastructure for renewable energy parks.
Threats (material, not boilerplate)
- Fluctuations in raw material prices (power cables, transformers, switchgear) without contractual price escalation clauses. risk_section
Why it matters: Unhedged equipment cost increases directly erode project gross margins during long execution cycles. - CAG and AG audit objections leading to payment recoveries or bank guarantee encashment by state utilities. risk_section
Why it matters: Audit disputes with DISCOMs jeopardize accrued price variation claims and lock up performance guarantees.
Live Subscription Status
Total subscription is fed live from the exchange data feed. The category split (QIB, NII, retail) is not carried by that feed and is added by hand where it is material — so it is shown only when we have actually verified it, rather than left as blanks.
Allotment Status
Check your allotment on the registrar's portal → Registrar: MUFG Intime India
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 (06 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.
Why is nearly 70% of net fresh issue proceeds designated for working capital rather than capital expenditure?
Because Swastika Infra operates an asset-light sub-contracting model, capital intensity lies in working capital (trade receivables, retention money, and margin money for bank guarantees). Allocating ₹ 90.00 crore to working capital provides the required liquidity headroom to execute its ₹ 916.55 crore order book without straining cash flows.
p.110, p.113, p.114How does management mitigate the risk of deriving nearly 97% of revenue from state government utilities?
The company mitigates DISCOM concentration by diversifying geographically across nine states (with Himachal Pradesh, West Bengal, Rajasthan, and Gujarat leading) and targeting projects funded by central schemes like RDSS or World Bank assistance.
p.28, p.197, p.199What drove the expansion in PAT margin from 7.82% in FY25 to 8.23% in FY26?
Margin expansion was driven by operating leverage on higher project execution scale (revenue up 43.57%), improved material procurement terms, and operational efficiencies in turnkey feeder segregation and underground cabling contracts.
p.76, p.125, p.327What is the status of the CAG and AG audit recovery disputes with AVVNL and JVVNL?
Swastika Infra has filed Civil Writ Petitions before the High Court of Rajasthan challenging recovery notices from AVVNL (₹ 1.88 crore copper transformer price variation) and JVVNL (₹ 3.60 crore cable utilization). The cases remain pending with stay applications filed to prevent bank guarantee invocation.
p.28, p.48, p.348, p.349What 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vinay Gupta, Ruchira Gupta, Babulal Gupta and Krishna Mohan Gupta | ₹10.00 | 2019-08-07 | 18.5x |
| An early round from roughly 7 years ago, at roughly 18.5x 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. | |||
| Vinay Gupta and Babulal Gupta | ₹10.00 | 2021-03-25 | 18.5x |
| An early round from roughly 6 years ago, at roughly 18.5x 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. | |||
| Ruchira Gupta and Babulal Gupta | ₹10.00 | 2022-10-18 | 18.5x |
| An early round from roughly 4 years ago, at roughly 18.5x 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. | |||
| Pre-IPO Placement Subscribers (78 Allottees) | ₹165.00 | 2025-07-28 | 1.1x |
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.
- 30 Mar 2028Minimum Promoters' Contribution18 months
- 30 Mar 2027Promoters Excess Shareholding6 months
- 30 Mar 2027Pre-Offer Capital6 months
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 consolidated financial statements were updated in the RHP to incorporate full Fiscal 2026 audited performance, dropping the six-month period ended September 30, 2024, as well as Fiscals 2023 and 2022. | Six-month period ended September 30, 2024, and Fiscals 2024, 2023, and 2022 | Fiscals 2026, 2025, and 2024 |
| Restated Financials Restated financial statements were updated to reflect Fiscal 2026 performance, showing revenue from operations growing to ₹ 503.57 crore and PAT expanding to ₹ 41.43 crore. | FY24 Revenue from operations of ₹ 209.58 crore, Restated PAT of ₹ 13.98 crore | FY26 Revenue from operations of ₹ 503.57 crore, Restated PAT of ₹ 41.43 crore |
| Use of Proceeds Fresh issue size reduced by ₹ 71.00 crore from up to ₹ 200.00 crore in DRHP to ₹ 129.00 crore in RHP, following a Pre-IPO Placement of ₹ 40.00 crore (24,24,242 shares at ₹ 165/share). | Fresh Issue up to ₹ 200.00 crore | Fresh Issue up to ₹ 129.00 crore (₹ 90.00 crore for working capital, balance for GCP) |
| Offer for Sale Offer for sale share count reduced by 1,70,000 Equity Shares from 19,20,000 shares in DRHP to 17,50,000 shares in RHP. | Up to 19,20,000 Equity Shares | Up to 17,50,000 Equity Shares |
| Contingent Liabilities Outstanding bank guarantee contingent liabilities expanded from ₹ 112.25 crore as of September 30, 2024 in DRHP to ₹ 272.68 crore as of March 31, 2026 in RHP. | ₹ 112.25 crore bank guarantees (as of September 30, 2024) | ₹ 272.68 crore bank guarantees (as of March 31, 2026) |
| Litigation Materiality threshold set at ₹ 1.38 crore in RHP, adding an active civil writ petition against JVVNL for ₹ 3.60 crore and updating tax proceeding demands. | 1 material civil proceeding by company (₹ 1.88 crore AVVNL writ petition) and ₹ 1.11 crore tax proceedings | Materiality threshold of ₹ 1.38 crore; 2 material civil proceedings by company (₹ 1.88 crore AVVNL and ₹ 3.60 crore JVVNL writ petitions) and ₹ 2.69 crore direct/indirect tax proceedings |
| Risk Factors Internal risk factors re-organized from 60 in DRHP to 54 in RHP, incorporating updated disclosures on the Pre-IPO placement, updated Mordor Industry Report, and expanded bank guarantee liabilities. | 60 internal risk factors | 54 internal risk factors |
| Statutory Dues Statutory dues disclosures updated to reflect Fiscal 2026 compliance records and receipt of ROC E-hearing notice dated February 6, 2026. | Disclosed instances of short delays in filing GST returns and depositing PF/ESIC for Fiscals 2022-2024, plus pending ROC adjudication for delayed CS appointment | Disclosed instances of delays in GST, PF, ESIC (₹ 0.0015 crore across 30 cases), and Profession Tax (₹ 0.0051 crore across 9 cases) for FY26, plus ROC E-hearing notice dated February 6, 2026 received |
Educational, grounded entirely in the company's filings (DRHP/RHP). Not investment advice. FinMinutes does not provide buy/sell recommendations.
