K.M.Sugar Mills — Peer Comparison

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

Peer selection

Peers are selected from the same Fast Moving Consumer 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

Fast Moving Consumer 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
K.M.Sugar Mills KMSUGAR · you	₹293 Cr	4.7×	0.6×	6.0×	13.6%	8.1%	4.6%
Sector median	—	27.6×	4.1×	19.0×	10.3%	2.4%	5.8%
ADF Foods Limited ADFFOODS	₹2,747 Cr	32.0×	5.0×	21.5×	15.7%	13.2%	14.9%
Prataap Snacks Limited DIAMONDYD	₹2,733 Cr	291.7×	4.0×	32.9×	1.4%	0.6%	1.4%
Globus Spirits Limited GLOBUSSPR	₹2,638 Cr	27.6×	2.3×	11.0×	8.4%	2.5%	8.6%
Flair Writing Industries Limited FLAIR	₹2,628 Cr	19.2×	2.4×	11.2×	12.2%	11.2%	9.9%
Tasty Bite Eatables Limited TASTYBITE	₹2,566 Cr	71.4×	8.9×	—	12.4%	0.1%	—
Sundrop Brands Limited SUNDROP	₹2,503 Cr	97.3×	5.1×	—	5.2%	0.0%	—
Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Limited BAJAJHIND	₹2,457 Cr	20.5×	1.1×	16.6×	3.3%	2.3%	-4.9%
Eveready Industries India Limited EVEREADY	₹2,451 Cr	15.1×	4.2×	23.9×	27.5%	11.8%	3.1%

Peer comparison verdict

K.M.Sugar looks attractively valued — trading at a discount to sector peers on P/E (4.7× vs sector median 27.6×) while delivering above-average returns on equity (13.6% vs 10.3%).

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

40% weight · 7 peers

Sector median PE27.6×

Fair value via PE₹187

20% weight · 8 peers

Sector median PB4.1×

Fair value via PB₹218

EV/EBITDA

40% weight · 6 peers

Sector median EV/EBITDA19.0×

Fair value via EV/EBITDA₹101

Blended peer fair value₹159

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.