Cello World Ltd

Price story Before the numbers, the tape. A stock price moves through four repeating seasons: a flat base (stage 1), an advance (2), a top (3), a decline (4). Where the price sits in that cycle frames everything below.

Cello World Ltd trades at ₹365, in a downtrend and 87 weeks into that stage. That is −21.2% against its own 200-day average. It sits at 0% of a 52-week range of ₹365 to ₹655. On relative strength it is currently behind the NIFTY 500 on a trailing-13-week view (36 weeks and counting).

Today the stock is in a downtrend — week 87 of stage 4, confirmed. At ₹365 it trades −21.2% versus its 200-day average and sits at 0% of its 52-week range (₹365–₹655).

Against the market, two honest reads. Cumulative: over the last 2.7 years the stock moved −54% while the NIFTY 500 moved +32% — behind the index over the full window. Recent form: on a trailing-13-week view the stock is currently behind (36 weeks and counting; last ahead the week of 2025-11-28) — the ribbon below is that same metric, week by week.

What would end the trend, mechanically: two Friday closes in a row below the 200-day line. That is the exit rule — no debates.

→ The trend is one thing; the bill is another. Are you paying up for it? Next: the P/E sits at the 1st percentile of its own range.

Valuation P/E is the price of ₹1 of annual profit: how many rupees the market pays for each rupee the company earns in a year.

Cello World Ltd trades at 22.6× P/E, about the cheapest it has ever traded. Its long-run median P/E is 40.5×, measured across 2.7 years of weekly readings. This places the multiple against the stock’s own record, and says nothing about what the business is worth.

Today's P/E of 22.6× is about the cheapest it has ever traded, against a long-run median of 40.5× measured over 2.7 years of weekly readings. This is a comparison against the stock's own history — not a claim about what it is worth.

Why the multiple sits where it does: over the past year annual EPS moved −9.0% against a −41.2% price move — earnings outran the price, pushing the multiple DOWN its own range.

Put together: the multiple is low against its own past, so the story rests on the earnings line underneath it, not the multiple.

The PEG ratio and its quarterly curve, which only the second data source carries, are not drawn on this page: its two data sources disagree by up to 9.2% on reported income across 13 comparable periods. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.

→ Cheap or dear rides on the earnings. Are they actually growing? Next: the fundamental stage — where the business sits in its arc, and how growth has compounded.

Stage: Mixed Every business sits somewhere on a fundamental arc, and this page names the spot before anything else. The last twelve quarters of revenue, profit and EPS growth — plus the return the business earns on its capital — are read as curves: Deteriorating (the curves are falling), Turning around (a trough has just formed and the last few quarters lift off it), Improving (the climb off the trough is sustained), Consistent (steadily positive with healthy returns), Topping out (still high but decelerating from the peak). When the curves genuinely disagree the read is Mixed; too little history is No read. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is the smooth yearly pace that turns the starting value into the latest one — the fairest way to compare growth across different time spans. Read the columns together: if the 1-year number towers over the 10-year, recent growth is running hotter than the long-run trend. A dash means that window is not held, or the base year was a loss (where a growth rate is not meaningful).

Cello World Ltd reads as mixed on its fundamental arc. Mixed — no clean majority across the growth curves, ROCE slipping at 17.0% — the per-curve reads carry the story. The read is built from 9 quarters across 3 curves, on partial evidence.

Why it matters: when the curves disagree, the per-curve reads above matter more than any single verdict.

Return readings here are annual, not quarterly — read as level and direction only; they can confirm the growth curves but never drive the stage on their own.

A partial read: at least one curve is short, or the returns curve is not the computed quarterly series — hold the stage word a little more loosely.

→ The stage names the trajectory. Next: the revenue line that produces it, quarter by quarter.

4-Factor Sector Score

43.3/100 — rank 2 of 3 in Opalware · 74% evidence confidence

Cello World Ltd scores 43.3 out of 100 against the 3 companies it is compared with in Opalware, ranking 2. Cheap but unconfirmed: require improving earnings before treating the valuation as an opportunity.

The four contributions add to the total exactly: 6.6 + 19.6 + 13.5 + 3.6 = 43.3. This is the SAME number shown on the sector comparison — it is computed once, for the whole peer set, and read here.

What would change it: The read weakens if profit growth turns negative or margin improvement reverses while sector-relative strength deteriorates.

Revenue Revenue is the top line: everything the company billed its customers in the period.

Cello World Ltd reported ₹654 Cr of revenue in the Mar 26 quarter, +11.0% year on year. Over 5 years it has compounded at 17.2% a year. The last full year, FY26, came in at ₹2,324 Cr. The last four reported quarters add to ₹2,324 Cr.

Cello World Ltd reported ₹654 Cr of revenue in the Mar 26 quarter, +11.0% year on year. Over 5 years it has compounded at 17.2% a year. The last full year, FY26, came in at ₹2,324 Cr. The last four reported quarters add to ₹2,324 Cr.

FY26 revenue came in at ₹2,324 Cr (+8.8% on the year), capping 5 years at 17.2% compound. The latest quarter (Mar 26) printed ₹654 Cr, +11.0% year on year.

Pace check: the last four quarters averaged +9.0% growth against the decade's 17.2% — the current year is running slower than its own long-run rate.

Acceleration check: trailing-twelve-month revenue grew +8.8% over the last 4 quarters against +7.8%/yr over the last 8 — stabilising; TTM profit −9.1% vs −3.7%/yr — rolling over.

→ Revenue grew — did margins hold as it scaled? Next: 20.0% this quarter (−3.0 pp YoY).

Operating margin Operating margin is what is left of every ₹100 of sales after running the business, before interest and tax. It is the cleanest read on pricing power and cost control.

Cello World Ltd's operating margin is 20.0% in the Mar 26 quarter, −3.0 percentage points against the same quarter a year ago. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 20.0% to 26.0%. The current quarter sits inside that band.

Cello World Ltd's operating margin is 20.0% in the Mar 26 quarter, −3.0 percentage points against the same quarter a year ago. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 20.0% to 26.0%. The current quarter sits inside that band.

The latest quarter's operating margin is 20.0%, −3.0 pp against the same quarter a year ago. Across 6 fiscal years the operating margin has ranged 20.0%–26.0%.

🚨 Why the margin moved: operating margin went −3.2 pp year on year while gross margin went −5.2 pp — the loss came mostly from the gross line: input costs and pricing.

→ Margins slipped — did that reach the bottom line? Next: profit −6.3% in the latest quarter.

Net profit Net profit is what survives every cost, interest and tax — the number EPS, dividends and book value all grow from.

Cello World Ltd earned ₹90.0 Cr of net profit in the Mar 26 quarter, −6.3% year on year. Full-year FY26 profit was ₹332 Cr. The 5-year compound rate is 14.9%. That is 13.8% of the quarter's revenue. The same quarter a year earlier earned ₹96.0 Cr.

Cello World Ltd earned ₹90.0 Cr of net profit in the Mar 26 quarter, −6.3% year on year. Full-year FY26 profit was ₹332 Cr. The 5-year compound rate is 14.9%. That is 13.8% of the quarter's revenue. The same quarter a year earlier earned ₹96.0 Cr.

Mar 26 profit was ₹90.0 Cr, −6.3% year on year. On the full year, FY26 printed ₹332 Cr (−9.0%), and the 5-year compound rate is 14.9%.

🚨 Why profit moved: revenue contributed +11.0% and the margin −3.0 pp — the quarter was revenue-led despite a thinner margin.

Pace comparison, last four quarters: profit −8.9% vs revenue +9.0%. Profit is growing slower than sales — costs are eating the growth before it reaches the bottom line.

→ Profit rose — but did the cash follow? Next: 71% of the last 3 years' profit arrived as cash.

Cash flow — the router The P&L says what was earned; the cash-flow statement says what actually arrived. Operating cash flow (CFO) against profit is the cleanest lie detector in the accounts.

Over the last 3 fiscal years 71% of Cello World Ltd's reported profit arrived as operating cash — most of the profit is real cash. In FY26 that was ₹255 Cr of operating cash against ₹332 Cr of profit. After ₹220 Cr of capital spending, ₹35.0 Cr was left as free cash.

FY26: operating cash of ₹255 Cr against reported profit of ₹332 Cr, leaving free cash of ₹35.0 Cr after ₹220 Cr of capital spending. Across the last 3 fiscal years the conversion rate is 71% of profit.

Cash-flow readings here are annual — that is the resolution our series carries, so this section moves once a year.

Why conversion sits at 71%: the cash cycle tightened 35 days between FY21 and FY26 — cash that used to wait in the cycle now reaches the bank sooner.

Router verdict: the bigger cash user is investment — capital spending ran 3.4× depreciation over three years, so the next section's job is to check what that build-out is buying.

→ So follow the cash to where it goes. Next: ₹676 Cr of building over 3 years.

Where the cash goes Working capital is the cash tied up between paying suppliers and getting paid: debtor days (customers owe), inventory days (stock waits), and the cash conversion cycle (the whole loop, in days of sales).

Cello World Ltd's cash conversion cycle runs 255 days in FY26, down from 290 days in FY21. Capital spending ran ₹676 Cr over the last 3 years. At FY26 sales of ₹2,324 Cr each day of that cycle holds about ₹6.4 Cr, so roughly ₹1,624 Cr sits inside the business at any moment.

FY26: debtors at 118 days, inventory at 191 days — roughly 6.3 months of stock waiting to sell; that is where the cash sits while it waits — for a full cycle of 255 days, tighter than FY21's 290.

The full loop: cash goes out to suppliers and production on day 0; stock waits 191 days to sell; customers pay about 118 days after that; and suppliers themselves are paid at 54 days — netting out to the 255-day cycle.

In money terms: at FY26 sales of ₹2,324 Cr, each day of the cycle holds about ₹6.4 Cr — so the 255-day loop keeps roughly ₹1,624 Cr sitting inside the business at any moment.

On the investment side: capital spending of ₹676 Cr over the last 3 fiscal years against ₹197 Cr of depreciation — the company is building well ahead of wear-and-tear. Capital work-in-progress stands at ₹66.0 Cr (FY26) — capacity paid for but not yet earning.

The synthesis: the cash is going into capacity, not disappearing into the cycle — the question becomes whether the new capacity earns.

→ Does all this activity actually earn its cost of capital? Next: ROCE is 17%.

Return on capital Return on capital employed (ROCE) is the profit the whole business earns on all the money in it — equity and debt together. It is the single best test of whether growth creates value or just size.

Cello World Ltd earns a ROCE of 17% in FY26. A return-on-invested-capital spread against the cost of capital is not computable from what is held here. The wiring behind it is 14.3% net margin on 0.77× asset turns.

FY26 ROCE is 17%.

Why the return is what it is — the wiring (FY26): 14.3% net margin × 0.77× asset turns × 1.11× balance-sheet leverage ≈ 12.2% on equity. Margin does its share; leverage is modest — this is an earned return, not a borrowed one.

The quarterly return curves and the return-on-invested-capital overlay, which only the second data source carries, are not drawn on this page: its two data sources disagree by up to 9.2% on reported income across 13 comparable periods. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.

→ Returns like these — is the balance sheet borrowing to make them? Next: debt-to-equity is 0.01.

Debt Debt-to-equity says how much of the business is funded by borrowings; interest cover says how many times operating profit pays the interest bill. Low and high, respectively, is the safe corner.

Cello World Ltd carries ₹38.0 Cr of borrowings against ₹2,701 Cr of equity in FY26, a debt-to-equity of 0.01. Operating profit covers the interest bill north of 100×. Over 5 years borrowings went from ₹334 Cr to ₹38.0 Cr. Capital spending ran ₹676 Cr across the last 3 of those years.

FY26: borrowings of ₹38.0 Cr against equity of ₹2,701 Cr — a debt-to-equity of 0.01. Operating profit covers the interest bill north of 100×. Over 5 years borrowings went from ₹334 Cr to ₹38.0 Cr while capital spending ran ₹676 Cr in just the last 3 — the build-out is being paid for out of cash, not debt.

The total-debt and debt-to-equity series, which only the second data source carries, are not drawn on this page: its two data sources disagree by up to 9.2% on reported income across 13 comparable periods. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.

→ Who owns this, and are they adding or leaving? Next: Promoters cut 3.1 points over 8 quarters.

Ownership Who owns the stock, quarter by quarter: promoters (the controlling owners), foreign and domestic institutions, and the public. Steady accumulation by people close to the numbers is a signal; a quiet register is also an answer.

Promoters cut 3.1 points of Cello World Ltd over 8 quarters, the biggest move on the register. That takes promoters to 75.0% of the company. Domestic institutions moved +3.1 points over the same window, to 15.1%. The register is read on the four disclosed classes only; nothing is inferred between filings.

The register over the last two years — Promoters: −3.1 points over 8 quarters to 75.0%; Domestic institutions: +3.1 points over 8 quarters to 15.1%; Foreign institutions: −2.6 points over 8 quarters to 3.2%.

Why the register moved: rotation — foreign institutions −2.6 points against domestic institutions +3.1 points over 8 quarters, with promoters −3.1 points — one class of institutions handing the register to the other, not a verdict change by the people closest to the numbers.

→ One last check: does the safety math agree? Next: the balance-sheet safety line.

Safety line The Z-score estimates how far a company sits from balance-sheet distress — above roughly 3 is safe, below roughly 1.8 is the danger zone. It was built for manufacturers, so it is not applied to banks and lenders.

Cello World Ltd: the Z-score is withheld — it comes from the second data source this page could not reconcile, and a solvency score is not worth printing on a number two sources dispute. It is a distance-to-distress estimate from the balance sheet, not a forecast of failure.

The safety line in one sentence: the Z-score is withheld — it comes from the second data source this page could not reconcile, and a solvency score is not worth printing on a number two sources dispute.

Frequently asked questions