Sampark India Logistics 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 Ports, logistics & shipping 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

Ports, logistics & shipping · 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
Sampark India Logistics Limited SILL · you	₹107 Cr	16.2×	—	—	—	—	—
Sector median	—	25.0×	1.6×	8.6×	8.6%	1.9%	9.3%
Ritco Logistics Limited RITCO	₹763 Cr	25.0×	2.5×	8.2×	9.9%	2.4%	25.9%
Snowman Logistics Limited SNOWMAN	₹634 Cr	118.6×	1.6×	—	1.3%	0.0%	—
Om Freight Forwarders Limited OMFREIGHT	₹365 Cr	20.9×	1.6×	11.0×	7.5%	3.2%	0.4%
TRANSWORLD SHIPPING LINES LIMITED TRANSWORLD	₹343 Cr	-10.5×	0.4×	—	-4.1%	1.3%	—
Tiger Logistics (India) Limited TIGERLOGS	₹271 Cr	14.3×	2.2×	—	15.3%	0.0%	—
AVG Logistics Limited AVG	₹231 Cr	12.3×	1.2×	2.8×	9.7%	4.7%	9.3%
DJ Mediaprint & Logistics Limited DJML	₹217 Cr	33.0×	4.0×	9.1×	12.1%	7.9%	39.7%
Lancer Container Lines Limited LANCER	₹208 Cr	49.4×	0.5×	328.9×	0.8%	1.4%	-22.2%

Peer comparison verdict

Sampark trades at a discount to sector peers on P/E (16.2× vs median 25.0×). This may signal undervaluation — or reflect lower expected growth or higher perceived risk versus the peer group.

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 · 7 peers

Sector median PE25.0×

Fair value via PE₹134

25% weight · 8 peers

Sector median PB1.6×

Fair value via PB—

EV/EBITDA

40% weight · 4 peers

Sector median EV/EBITDA8.6×

Fair value via EV/EBITDA—

Blended peer fair value₹134

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.