CRYOGENIC OGS LIMITED — Peer Comparison

How the peer fair value is calculated and which companies were used as benchmarks.

Peer selection

Peers are selected from the same Capital Goods industry. 8 companies were matched as valid comparables.

Same-industry peers share similar business models, cost structures, and growth prospects — making them the most appropriate benchmarks for valuation multiples.

Peer comparison table

Capital Goods · 8 peers · sector medians shown

Better than medianWorse than median

Company	Mkt Cap	P/E	P/B	EV/EBITDA	ROE	Net Margin	Rev CAGR 3y
CRYOGENIC OGS LIMITED CRYOGENIC · you	₹498 Cr	49.8×	—	—	—	—	—
Sector median	—	48.2×	5.6×	21.1×	8.0%	0.0%	8.4%
Subros Limited SUBROS	₹4,956 Cr	29.8×	4.9×	—	16.4%	0.0%	—
Surya Roshni Limited SURYAROSNI	₹4,852 Cr	15.6×	2.1×	—	13.7%	0.0%	—
DEE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS LIMITED DEEDEV	₹4,766 Cr	73.6×	5.9×	—	7.4%	0.0%	—
GMM Pfaudler Limited GMMPFAUDLR	₹4,699 Cr	87.4×	6.2×	—	7.0%	0.0%	—
BOROSIL RENEWABLES LIMITED BORORENEW	₹4,641 Cr	61.1×	5.4×	17.5×	8.5%	8.3%	20.3%
Greaves Cotton Limited GREAVESCOT	₹4,495 Cr	43.5×	3.2×	21.1×	7.5%	3.1%	8.4%
Shilchar Technologies Limited SHILCTECH	₹4,462 Cr	32.4×	17.4×	—	53.6%	0.2%	—
Centum Electronics Limited CENTUM	₹4,441 Cr	52.8×	16.3×	30.7×	-13.6%	-4.9%	1.1%

Peer comparison verdict

CRYOGENIC is fairly valued relative to sector peers — trading near the sector median on key multiples (P/E ~48.2×, EV/EBITDA ~21.1×). Focus on execution quality and earnings trajectory from here.

How the peer fair value is calculated

Three valuation methods are weighted by sector. Each gives a fair value based on how sector peers are currently priced.

Method breakdown

35% weight · 8 peers

Sector median PE48.2×

Fair value via PE₹337

25% weight · 8 peers

Sector median PB5.6×

Fair value via PB—

EV/EBITDA

40% weight · 3 peers

Sector median EV/EBITDA21.1×

Fair value via EV/EBITDA—

Blended peer fair value₹337

Why median? Why these weights?

Median over mean: The sector median is used instead of the average because valuation multiples have extreme outliers — one high-growth company at 200× P/E would dramatically skew a mean. The median gives the middle value in the peer set, which better represents typical pricing.

Sector-specific weights: The weight given to each method reflects what matters most in this sector. For banks, P/B dominates because their value is tied to book assets. For IT companies, P/E carries the most weight because earnings quality matters more than asset base. For capital-intensive businesses, EV/EBITDA accounts for varying debt levels across peers and removes financing structure bias.

Limitations of peer comparison

Peer comparison assumes comparable companies are truly comparable — which is never perfectly true. Sector classifications can be imperfect: a conglomerate classified as "IT" may also have significant manufacturing revenue. Small peer counts (below 5) reduce confidence, as a single outlier can skew the sector median. When the entire sector is broadly expensive, peer comparison will show even an expensive stock as "fairly valued" relative to its peers.

The peer fair value shown is an algorithmic estimate based on publicly available financial data. It is not investment advice or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Please consult a SEBI-registered investment adviser before making any investment decision.