GEREGU
Investo's verdict, shared with you
No fair value published
The derivation ran and was refused by our own plausibility checks. We publish no number rather than a plausible-looking one.
Why · 3 checks
Our valuation methods disagree
The earnings-based and book-based readings of this company differ by more than 2.5×. That spread is real information, but averaging it would manufacture a number no method actually produced.
The derivation failed our plausibility check
The computed value landed outside the 0.4×–2.5× band that real price targets occupy. A result that far from the traded price means one of our inputs is wrong, not that the market is wrong by that much — so we publish nothing rather than clamp it into range.
Implied book multiple is far from the peer group
At the computed value this company would trade at a P/B a long way from its sector median. Either the book-value input or the peer anchor is unreliable.
What we would need
- Earnings and book value drawn from the same set of accounts, so the two legs can be reconciled.
- A per-share input (earnings or book value) that reconciles to the latest audited totals.
- A verified book value per share, or a peer group with enough clean constituents.
Show what the engine computed
Rejected figure · ₦114.51 — floor — raw base ₦114.51 is 0.14x price. This figure is shown only to document what was refused; it is not an estimate and no upside is computed from it.
Method spread · 4.73× between the highest and lowest valuation leg.
Methods disagree · The valuation legs disagree by 4.73x (Blended P/E band ₦150.01 vs Blended P/B band ₦31.69). No point estimate is defensible until the inputs are reconciled.
Failed plausibility rail · Fair value hit our plausibility bounds: floor — raw base ₦114.51 is 0.14x price. The published base is the rail, not a derivation.
Implied P/B off peers · Implied P/B at base 7.41x is 3.61x the sector median 2.05x.
Source: NGX live market data · Investo intelligence. Educational only — not financial advice.