Back to Paras Defence and Space Technologies

Paras Defence and Space Technologies — Peer Comparison

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

Base peer fair value

₹840.07

Bear uses each eligible multiple’s 25th percentile; Base retains the current production median; Bull uses the 75th percentile. Quartiles interpolate between sorted observations at (n − 1) × percentile. Each peer has equal weight within a method. These are distribution scenarios, not confidence intervals or scenario probabilities.

Selected peers and raw cached multiples
Peer	P/E	P/B	EV/EBITDA	P/S
BDL	103.49	10.26	197.30	—
COCHINSHIP	52.91	6.46	46.73	—
GRSE	40.58	11.56	38.17	4.34
DATAPATTNS	85.44	13.36	68.66	—
HBLENGINE	26.59	9.78	19.58	—
BEML	104.64	5.04	49.47	3.40
ZENTEC	73.72	7.55	57.46	20.74
SWANDEF	-54.00	34.94	—	—

The current peer engine’s selected industry/sector peers and cached multiples are preserved. Subject multiples use the engine’s existing EOD-price scaling. Peer observations may have different refresh dates; these scenarios do not claim synchronized market data.

P/E · 35.00% effective method weight

Company multiple: 108.1000×. Eligible peers (7): BDL 103.4900×; COCHINSHIP 52.9100×; GRSE 40.5800×; DATAPATTNS 85.4400×; HBLENGINE 26.5900×; BEML 104.6400×; ZENTEC 73.7200×.

Scenario	Peer multiple	Implied fair value
Bear (P25)	46.7450×	₹548.27
Base (median)	73.7200×	₹864.66
Bull (P75)	94.4650×	₹1,107.98

P/B · 25.00% effective method weight

Company multiple: 13.1000×. Eligible peers (7): BDL 10.2600×; COCHINSHIP 6.4600×; GRSE 11.5600×; DATAPATTNS 13.3600×; HBLENGINE 9.7800×; BEML 5.0400×; ZENTEC 7.5500×.

Scenario	Peer multiple	Implied fair value
Bear (P25)	7.0050×	₹677.99
Base (median)	9.7800×	₹946.57
Bull (P75)	10.9100×	₹1,055.94

EV/EBITDA · 40.00% effective method weight

Company multiple: 81.1000×. Eligible peers (6): COCHINSHIP 46.7301×; GRSE 38.1669×; DATAPATTNS 68.6649×; HBLENGINE 19.5849×; BEML 49.4718×; ZENTEC 57.4645×.

Scenario	Peer multiple	Implied fair value
Bear (P25)	40.3077×	₹630.16
Base (median)	48.1010×	₹752.00
Bull (P75)	55.4663×	₹867.15

Fair value = the production method’s median fair value × scenario multiple ÷ median multiple, equivalent to the current engine’s price × peer multiple ÷ subject multiple. Effective method weights are normalized across methods with a fair value; the final peer result is rounded to two decimals.

Only methods eligible under the current sector/company rules contribute. Subject multiples must be positive. Peer observations must pass the existing method-specific bounds and sector caps. Four eligible peers per contributing method are required for quartiles; the production median's existing minimum is unchanged. A missing method's Bear/Bull is not replaced with another method or a Base estimate.

Final peer scenario values
Bear	Base	Bull
₹613.46	₹840.07	₹998.64

Peer selection

Peers are selected from the same Defence & aerospace 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

Defence & aerospace · 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
Paras Defence and Space Technologies PARAS · you	₹9,890 Cr	108.1×	13.1×	81.1×	12.1%	18.5%	28.9%
Sector median	—	73.7×	9.8×	48.1×	11.2%	15.7%	28.5%
Bharat Dynamics BDL	₹44,070 Cr	103.5×	10.3×	197.3×	9.9%	17.2%	-0.6%
Cochin Shipyard COCHINSHIP	₹37,893 Cr	52.9×	6.5×	46.7×	12.2%	14.3%	28.5%
Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers GRSE	₹30,354 Cr	40.6×	11.6×	38.2×	28.5%	10.7%	39.8%
Data Patterns India DATAPATTNS	₹25,473 Cr	85.4×	13.4×	68.7×	15.6%	29.3%	26.8%
HBL Engineering HBLENGINE	₹21,182 Cr	26.6×	9.8×	19.6×	36.8%	24.7%	34.1%
BEML BEML	₹14,792 Cr	104.6×	5.0×	49.5×	4.8%	3.2%	3.7%
Zen Technologies ZENTEC	₹14,261 Cr	73.7×	7.5×	57.5×	10.2%	28.1%	46.5%
SWAN DEFENCE AND HEAVY INDUSTRIES LIMITED SWANDEF	₹12,846 Cr	-54.0×	34.9×	—	-64.7%	-1.4%	—

Peer comparison verdict

Paras trades at a premium to sector peers on P/E (108.1× vs median 73.7×). The market is pricing in higher growth — worth verifying whether recent revenue trends support that expectation.

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.