Case 02 · Listed company
Making the re-rating case from the company's own numbers
A listed company's valuation trailed its peers, and management had no single view connecting how the business performs to how the market prices it. We built one — internal financials and live MIS, set against peer valuations, news flow and share-price movement — and the investor narrative that follows from it.
The situation
The market was pricing a story management hadn't told.
Management knew the business was performing. The share price didn't reflect it, and there was no view that explained the gap in terms an analyst would accept.
- Internal performance and market valuation sat in different worlds — one in the ERP, the other in analyst notes and news.
- Peer comparisons were ad hoc, built for a presentation and never updated.
- Investor and PR messaging wasn't anchored to specific, defensible figures.
What we built
The analyst's view, from inside the company.
- Peer valuation benchmarking against listed comparables, refreshed as peers report.
- News flow, sentiment and share-price movement, read against the company's own numbers rather than in isolation.
- A board-grade stakeholder report written in an equity analyst's voice, with a short strategic read on top.
- An explicit re-rating thesis — what would close the valuation gap — and the investor-relations and PR narrative to communicate it.
What was hard
Credibility, not charts.
An analyst voice that stays honest. The read is written the way an analyst writes, but every number in it is computed by code first. The writing explains the figures; it never produces them.
Separating internal from external. Some analysis was for management only. It had to be kept out of anything that could reach investors, with the boundary built into the system rather than left to judgment on the day.
Peers don't report alike. Comparisons only mean something on a consistent basis, so the definitions used are fixed and stated alongside the figures.
What changed
Valuation became something the board could discuss with numbers.
- Management sees what an analyst would write before the analyst writes it.
- The investor narrative is anchored to specific figures that hold up to questioning.
- The valuation gap is discussed with a named trigger for closing it, rather than as a complaint about the market.
Client name withheld at the client's request. A reference call can be arranged under NDA.