MSPL (MSPL)
MSPL — Stage 1 setup with EFS 63.8 and investment score 40.0.
Investment Read
Separate the operating business, governance and capital structure from the entry price: MSPL is a cyclical integrated steel-and-power company where execution and balance-sheet quality matter as much as headline growth.
The opportunity is operating recovery and scale; the risk is leverage, pledge and steel-cycle volatility.
Company: MSPL operates an integrated steel-and-power platform producing sponge iron, billets, TMT bars, structural products and power. The latest available quarter reported 827 Cr revenue and 22 Cr PAT, but a single quarter does not establish a durable cycle or cash-return inflection.
Leadership and governance: the FY25 annual report identifies Suresh Kumar Agrawal as Chairman, Saket Agrawal as Managing Director and Manish Agrawal as Joint Managing Director. The independent-director group comprises Suneeta Mohanty, Pranab Kumar Chakraborty, Pramode Kumar Pandey and Anubhav Goenka; Kamal Kumar Jain is CFO and Shreya Kar is Company Secretary and Compliance Officer. This is a promoter-led business with formal independent oversight, so related-party transactions, promoter pledge, remuneration and capital-allocation disclosures should be monitored closely.
Investment perspective: the business can benefit from integrated production, captive power and an improving steel cycle, while scale remains below the large listed producers. The scorecard is therefore mixed: earnings quality and financial strength are moderate, sales growth is weaker, and the technical setup is Stage 3 with price below the 50-day average. The decision-useful test is whether volume, spreads and CFO improve without fresh balance-sheet stress or adverse share-count changes.
Decision Frame
- Company: integrated steel-and-power producer with promoter-led management and independent directors.
- Latest quarter: revenue 827 Cr; PAT 22 Cr; confirm standalone/consolidated scope.
- Scores: EFS 63.8; Investment 40.0; Technical 40.0.
- Technical: Stage 1, RSI 45.50, ADX 25.0.
- Invalidation: weaker spreads, negative CFO, rising debt/pledge, adverse dilution or a sustained trend breakdown.
Fundamental Scores
Agent Adda scores from snapshot (stage_snapshot + fundamental_scores). Useful ranking signals — not standalone buy/sell rules.
Score Interpretation
EFS 63.8 is the composite fundamental score: it indicates a reasonably strong combination of earnings quality (65.0), sales growth (55.0), financial strength (67.0), and institutional bias (71.0). The weaker sales-growth/financial-strength components are why the score is not a clean quality signal. Investment Score 40.0 is lower because it blends the fundamental stack with the current technical setup, where the technical score is 40.0. In plain English: the tape is stronger than the balance-sheet evidence, so the stock can screen well for momentum without removing execution, leverage, or valuation risk. Validate the scores against audited cash flow, debt, margins, dilution, and the next two quarters before treating them as conviction.
Company Overview
Business profile from MSP Steel & Power's FY2024-25 annual report and NSE/BSE disclosures.
What they do
Integrated steel and power producer with sponge iron, billets, TMT bars, structural steel and captive-power operations, centred in Chhattisgarh.
Operating model
The business is exposed to steel spreads, raw-material costs, power availability, working capital and the utilisation of its integrated assets.
Key watch
Debt and promoter pledge, conversion of recent profit growth into cash, steel-cycle sensitivity, capacity utilisation, corporate actions and execution versus larger peers.
Historical P&L
5 annual periods returned from the fundamentals extract. The latest available annual period shows revenue +4.1% and PAT +11.8% versus the prior period; confirm whether the change is organic, margin-led, or acquisition-led in the annual report.
| Period | Revenue | Op. Profit | OPM | PAT | EPS | Payout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2023 | 2,550 | 64 | 2.5% | -51 | -1.31 | 0% |
| Mar 2024 | 2,874 | 125 | 4.4% | 14 | 0.37 | 0% |
| Mar 2025 | 2,905 | 134 | 4.6% | -28 | -0.50 | 0% |
| Mar 2026 | 2,843 | 178 | 6% | 34 | 0.60 | 0% |
| TTM | 2,959 | 185 | 6% | 38 | 0.67 |
Quarterly Results
6 quarterly periods are available. Jun 2026 revenue was 827 Cr and PAT 22 Cr; the latest sequential change was revenue +1.3% and PAT -74.1%. Use the next filing to test whether the latest growth rate is recurring and whether operating margin and cash conversion are moving with earnings.
| Quarter | Revenue | Op. Profit | OPM | PAT | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2025 | 760 | 45 | 6% | -34 | -0.60 |
| Jun 2025 | 711 | 45 | 6% | 18 | 0.31 |
| Sep 2025 | 677 | 23 | 3.4% | -75 | -1.32 |
| Dec 2025 | 639 | 33 | 5% | 5 | 0.10 |
| Mar 2026 | 816 | 77 | 9% | 85 | 1.50 |
| Jun 2026 | 827 | 53 | 6% | 22 | 0.39 |
Balance Sheet And Cash Flow
3 balance-sheet/cash-flow periods are available. Latest reported borrowings are 321 Cr, CFO is 148 Cr, and FCF is 89 Cr. Read these alongside PAT, working-capital movements, capex, and financing flows: profit growth is higher quality when it converts to operating cash without repeated debt or equity funding.
| Balance sheet item | Mar 2024 | Mar 2025 | Mar 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equity Capital | 385 | 567 | 567 |
| Reserves | 166 | 381 | 463 |
| Borrowings+ | 813 | 294 | 321 |
| Total Liabilities | 1,638 | 1,535 | 1,728 |
| Fixed Assets+ | 816 | 790 | 794 |
| Total Assets | 1,638 | 1,535 | 1,728 |
| Cash flow item | Mar 2024 | Mar 2025 | Mar 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CFO | 170 | 189 | 148 |
| CFI | -50 | -34 | -58 |
| CFF | -106 | -178 | -90 |
| FCF | 125 | 157 | 89 |
| Net Cash | 15 | -22 | 0 |
Concall, Filings And News
Evidence reviewed: 0 concall artifacts and 6 exchange/company announcements. The read-through below distinguishes reported numbers, management claims, and checks required before relying on the catalyst.
Annual report and management read-through
- Quarter context (Jun 2026): Revenue 827 Cr (+16.3% YoY), PAT 22 Cr (+22.2% YoY).
- FY25 annual-report read-through: MSP Steel & Power Annual Report 2024-25 is the primary source for the audited group/standalone financials, integrated steel-and-power footprint, related parties, debt and promoter disclosures. The report should be read with the latest exchange result because the company has undergone capital-structure changes; do not compare EPS or per-share metrics across periods without checking the share-count and OCD conversion notes.
- Business-quality read-through: MSP Steel & Power is a smaller integrated steel producer, so recent earnings should be tested against steel realisations, input costs, volumes, captive-power economics and working-capital cash conversion rather than extrapolated as a straight-line growth story.
- Capital-structure check: the FY25 annual report and exchange filings must be reconciled for debt, promoter pledge and the conversion of optionally convertible debentures. These can materially alter per-share economics and financial risk.
- Competitive conclusion: JSW Steel, Tata Steel, Jindal Steel, SAIL and Jindal Stainless are scale peers; Lloyds Metals, Godawari Power, Sarda Energy, Jai Balaji and Gallantt are closer smaller-cap comparators. The comparison is directional because product mix, geography, integration and balance-sheet quality differ.
- Analytical check: compare the latest result with the annual report for margin durability, cash conversion, leverage, segment mix, and management guidance; separate reported facts from management claims.
BSE / NSE filing read-through
- FY25 annual report: primary source for audited financials, operations, debt, promoter pledge, related parties and risk disclosures.
- NSE FY25 integrated filing: confirms the listed symbol is MSPL and identifies the manufacturing steel segment.
- Peer snapshot: use JSW Steel, Tata Steel, Jindal Steel, SAIL and Jindal Stainless as scale references, while smaller-cap comparisons include Lloyds Metals, Godawari Power, Sarda Energy, Jai Balaji and Gallantt.
- Data-quality warning: no same-date peer dataset was available in PostgreSQL; web peer figures are dated market snapshots and must not be treated as live or like-for-like valuation evidence.
Concall evidence and what to test
- No dated concall materials were available.
Recent announcements and implications
- Announcement under Regulation 30 (LODR)-Newspaper Publication1 Aug- Copy of Newspaper Publication of the Unaudited Finan
- Statement Of Deviation & Variation31 Jul- Board approved Q1 FY2026-27 results; net profit ₹21.97 crore, no debt default,
- Board Meeting Outcome for Outcome Of Board Meeting Held On 31St July 2026 Under Regulation 30 Of The Listing Regulations
- Announcement under Regulation 30 (LODR)-Newspaper Publication29 Jul- Please find attached copies of newspaper advertisem
- Board Meeting Intimation for Intimation Of Board Meeting Under Regulation 29(1)(A) Of The Listing Regulations28 Jul- Boa
Sector And Competitive Context
MSP Steel & Power operates in a cyclical, capital-intensive steel market. Large integrated producers are scale references; smaller-cap steel producers are closer operating comparators, but all require normalisation for product mix, geography, integration and leverage.
| Company | Competitive role | What MSPL must match | Important difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JSW Steel / Tata Steel | Large integrated steel benchmarks | Cost position, scale, product mix and balance-sheet resilience | Much larger and more diversified, with stronger access to capital |
| Jindal Steel / SAIL | Integrated steel and domestic scale comparators | Volume growth, raw-material security and steel-cycle execution | Different scale, ownership and asset footprint |
| Jindal Stainless | Specialty/stainless steel comparator | Value-added mix and margin discipline | Stainless product economics differ from carbon steel |
| Lloyds Metals / Godawari Power | Smaller-cap integrated steel comparators | Production growth, captive resources and cash conversion | Different mines, products and regional exposure |
| Sarda Energy / Jai Balaji / Gallantt | Smaller-cap steel and power comparators | Operating leverage, debt reduction and execution | Varying power integration and product mix |
Competitive comparison is directional. Use large steel companies as scale benchmarks and smaller integrated producers as operating comparators; normalise for steel product mix, captive power/raw materials, debt, promoter pledge and the share-count impact of capital-structure changes.
Equity Chart V1
EOD chart from PostgreSQL market.equity_eod (130 bars). Range: 2026-02-18 → 2026-08-26.
Technical Analysis
Technical setup from cached snapshot (if available).
| Indicator | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Stage | Stage 1 | Weinstein stage |
| Signal | — | Snapshot |
| RSI | 45.50 | Momentum |
| ADX | 25.0 | Trend strength |
| SMA20/50/200 | 34.81 / 37.72 / 35.71 | Trend context |
| Supertrend | SELL | Trend filter |
| Ratio | Value |
|---|---|
| Market cap | INR 1,962 Cr |
| P/E | 14.1x |
| ROCE | 9.69% |
| ROE | 13.7% |
| Book value | INR 18.2 |
| High / Low | 46.12 / 26.25 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% |
Weinstein And O'Neil Read
Stan Weinstein Stage Analysis
The snapshot labels the stock Stage 1 (Stage 1 / base). Weinstein stage describes the position of price within a multi-month trend: Stage 1 is a base, Stage 2 an advance, Stage 3 a topping range, and Stage 4 a decline. It is a context framework, not a forecast or standalone trade signal.
Evidence check: price is not above all the 20/50/200-day averages, and the moving averages are not fully stacked bullishly (34.81 / 37.72 / 35.71). RSI is 45.50 (neutral); ADX is 25.0 (strong trend); Supertrend is SELL. A bullish stage with weak momentum, a broken moving-average stack, or a conflicting Supertrend reading is a lower-quality setup.
William O’Neil / CAN SLIM Lens
C — Current earnings: latest PAT growth is +22.2% and revenue growth is +16.3%; confirm the next two quarters and check whether margin and CFO support the growth. A — Annual earnings: latest annual revenue growth is -2.1%; fill the missing periods before claiming a multi-year CAGR. N — New: identify a new product, customer, capacity addition, or catalyst and distinguish company guidance from delivered results. S — Supply/demand: price/volume confirmation matters; share issuance, promoter selling, or thin liquidity can weaken the setup. L — Leader: relative strength is not available; compare against the correct sector and Nifty benchmark rather than using price alone. I — Institutions: institutional-bias score is 71.00; verify actual ownership trend. M — Market: confirm that the broader index and sector are supportive. The practical conclusion is a watchlist-quality setup only when earnings acceleration, leadership, volume, and a definable risk point align.
Broker And Market View
Broker/analyst evidence is shown only when dated source results are returned.
Valuation Scenarios
Illustrative valuation from TTM EPS and P/E multiples (not a recommendation).
| Scenario | TTM EPS | P/E | Implied value | vs current | Condition required |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bear (multiple compression) | 0.67 | 10x | 7 | -81% | Risk-off, slower growth, lower multiple. |
| Base (current multiple) | 0.67 | 14x | 9 | -73% | Steady execution; multiple holds. |
| Bull (multiple expansion) | 0.67 | 17x | 11 | -67% | Sustained growth + quality premium. |
Issues And Risks
MSPL-specific risks are steel-cycle sensitivity, leverage/promoter pledge, working-capital intensity, capital-structure complexity and execution.
| Risk | Why it matters | Severity | What to monitor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steel-cycle and spread risk | Realisation, scrap/iron-ore costs and demand can move margins sharply in a commodity business. | High | Steel prices, input costs, volumes and quarterly EBITDA margin. |
| Debt and promoter pledge | Leverage and pledged promoter shares increase refinancing, covenant and forced-selling risk. | High | Borrowings, interest cover, pledge percentage and lender disclosures. |
| Working capital | Inventory and receivables can consume cash even when reported profit improves. | Medium | CFO versus PAT, inventory days, receivable days and free cash flow. |
| Capital-structure changes | OCD conversion or other issuances can change share count, EPS comparability and control economics. | High | Fully diluted shares, conversion terms, related parties and exchange filings. |
| Execution and scale | Smaller scale versus integrated peers can limit cost competitiveness and resilience through downcycles. | Medium | Capacity utilisation, product mix, captive power and capex delivery. |
Manual Verification Before Posting
No deploy or email command should be run before this gate is complete.
Required Checks
- Verify financial tables vs Screener cache URL (if present) for MSPL.
- Cross-check FY and quarter labels against filings/annual report.
- Confirm technical snapshot date and whether it is EOD or intraday.
- If posting: add dated, source-attributed broker targets from the current source refresh.
Publishing Gate
- Research-only disclaimer present.
- No definitive buy/sell language.
- All key numbers backed by a primary source link.
Evidence Trail
Source-first trail for review.
- Screener consolidated page.
- NSE quote and filings.
- BSE quote and filings.
- MSP Steel & Power Annual Report 2024-25.
- NSE FY25 integrated filing.
- IIFL peer comparison — dated large-cap steel reference set.
- Economic Times competitor list — smaller-cap steel comparators.