Aster DM Healthcare IPO: Brokerage Views & Run up to IPO

Aster DM Healthcare
This post on Aster DM Healthcare IPO tries to bring out consolidated brokerage views opinions, IPO Review / Analysis, Note/ reports and recommendation of brokerages , Analyst, Business New papers, Management views, Grey Market Premium, Subscription etc on Aster DM Healthcare IPO and shall be updated continuously till the closure of the issue. The information collated from various sources and reports in public domain can help investors to decide whether they should subscribe to Galaxy Surfactants Limited IPO or not.

Related Post: Aster DM Healthcare IPO Review

Subscription: Aster DM Healthcare IPO  ( x times)
  QIB NII Retail Total
Day 3  2.1  .55  1.18 1.31
Day 2   0.5  0.23  0.47 0.43
Day 1* 0.5 0.16 0.15 0.25
* wrong reporting by NSE led led  to displaying high figures

Aster DM Healthcare IPO: Grey Market Premium etc.

15/2/18 Grey Market Premium  NIL
10/2/18 Grey Market Premium Rs. 10/- , Kostak Rs. 250/
Complete Anchor List

Anchor Investors (AIs) portion in the Public Issue of Aster DM Healthcare Limited for 154,75,843 equity shares have been subscribed today by 7 AIs at Rs. 190/- per equity share.. Aster DM Healthcare has raised Rs 294 cr from anchor investors like SBI MF, Sundaram MF, Karst Peak Asia Master Fund, DB International Asia, Societe Generale, Caisse De Depot Et Placement Du Quebec-First State Investments International and First State Indian Subcontinent Fund. 
Complete List of Anchor Investors: Aster DM Healthcare IPO

Consolidated opinion of Brokerages, Analysts, Business New Paper Reports, Management Views on Aster DM Healthcare IPO .

Angel Broking: “In terms of valuations, the pre-issue EV/EBITDA works out to 32.5x its 1HFY2018 annualized EBITDA (at the upper end of the issue price band), which is higher compared to its peers like Apollo Hospitals Enterprise (trading at PE 22.3x -1HFY2018 annualized EBITDA). On EV/ Bed basis, ADHL is `2.4cr vs Apollo Hospitals Enterprise’s `1.7cr. Further, last three years’ financial performance  including 1HFY18 numbers doesn’t provides confidence. Hence, we recommend Neutral rating on the issue. “

Capital Market: ” Score 27/100, There has been consistent fall in OPM due to provisioning for Saudi Arabia receivables. Interest cost and depreciation have remained high due to expansions and acquisitions. Operations in Saudi Arabia have been scaled down and shifted to private insurance players from government insurance players earlier. Further, start up of new clinics and hospitals also resulted in lower margins. “

Dalal Street Investment Journal: The company’s financial performance has been inconsistent over the last five years. Its profits have not been consistent and in H1FY18, the company has incurred losses. The margins are also too low. Moreover, the valuations are not too attractive at this level. The recent Union budget laid focus on the healthcare sector, which might help the sector gain some traction going forward. Aster DM Healthcare needs to stabilise and improve its margins. Also, the company’s major revenue is generated from outside India. Looking at the recent volatility in the markets, it is risky to invest in IPOs now. At this level, investors may not get to benefit much from the investment and hence, one can avoid this IPO. “

Hem Secuities: “Company is bringing the issue at price band of Rs 180-190 /sh at EV/EBIDTA multiple of 34-35. Although co’s business looks attractive but losses in H1FY18 with weak financial performance in FY17 & high valuation at current level fails to infuse optimism in company , hence we recommend “Avoid” on issue .”

SSJ Finance: “ADHL has reported a CAGR of 32.5% and 30.6% on revenue and net profit fronts respectively over FY2013-2017. On its upper band of price of Rs 190, the issue is priced at PE ratio of 28.7x of its FY2017 EPS of Rs 6.6. Most of its revenues comes from UAE and hence ADHL fortunes are directly related with oil. With lower oil prices we believe ADHL will face pressure on margins. Hence, we recommend to Avoid the IPO

Leave a Reply