Gayatri Highways — Peer Comparison
How the peer fair value is calculated and which companies were used as benchmarks.
Sign in to see this
Sign inPeer selection
Peers are selected from the same Services 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
Services · 8 peers · sector medians shown
| Company | Mkt Cap | P/E | P/B | EV/EBITDA | ROE | Net Margin | Rev CAGR 3y |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gayatri Highways GAYAHWS · you | ₹44 Cr | — | — | — | 0.2% | -8.4% | 24.0% |
| Sector median | — | 22.5× | 1.5× | 68.7× | 3.2% | 0.1% | -5.1% |
| Kothari Products Limited KOTHARIPRO | ₹407 Cr | 13.4× | 0.4× | — | 2.7% | 3.1% | -10.0% |
| Polo Queen Industrial and Fintech Limited PQIF | ₹405 Cr | 241.2× | 2.2× | — | 0.9% | 0.0% | — |
| Radiant Cash Management Services Limited RADIANTCMS | ₹386 Cr | 10.5× | 1.5× | — | 14.6% | 0.1% | — |
| Trishakti Industries Limited TRISHAKT | ₹375 Cr | 34.0× | 30.1× | — | 88.7% | 0.3% | — |
| Rotographics (India) Limited RGIL | ₹368 Cr | 329.4× | 105.3× | — | 32.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Dreamfolks Services Limited DREAMFOLKS | ₹351 Cr | 31.7× | 1.2× | 68.7× | 3.7% | 1.8% | -5.1% |
| Ekansh Concepts Limited EKANSH | ₹348 Cr | -103.6× | 7.1× | — | -6.9% | 0.1% | — |
| ATLANTAA LIMITED ATLANTAA | ₹326 Cr | — | 1.5× | — | -0.8% | -2.3% | 12.7% |
Gayatri is fairly valued relative to sector peers — trading near the sector median on key multiples (P/E ~22.5×, EV/EBITDA ~68.7×). Focus on execution quality and earnings trajectory from here.
Sign in to see this
Sign inWhy 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.