Valuation report · Technology & IT Services
FPT Corporation
FPT valuation separates the long-duration growth case from the public-market multiple check.
Fact file
- Price used
- VND 74.2k
- Price date
- 11 Jun 2026
- Model date
- 11 Jun 2026
- Methods
- DCF · Comparable Analysis
- Files
- 2 workbooks
Dated figures This model was last updated on 11 Jun 2026, 121 days before this page was built. Prices, estimates and peer multiples have not been refreshed since, so the implied moves below compare against the 11 Jun 2026 price, not today's.
Valuation range
DCF
83.2k
+12.1%
DCF: 72.1k to 95.2k, base case 83.2k; +12.1% versus 74.2kComparable
76.2k–77.1k
+3.3%
Comparable: 76.2k to 77.1k; +3.3% versus 74.2kBars are ranges; a heavy tick is a point estimate; a gap inside a bar marks the base case. Percentages compare each method's base case or midpoint with the 74.2k price the model used on 11 Jun 2026.
| Method | Value | vs price |
|---|---|---|
| DCF Base case; bar spans WACC 9.5–11.5% and exit EV/EBITDA 7.5–9.5x | 83.2k | +12.1% |
| Comparable Selected tech and telecom peer P/E medians on LTM, 2026E and 2027E earnings | 76.2k–77.1k | +3.3% |
- DCF output · VND 83.2k/share
- The DCF is the growth-upside case. It values FPT as a durable compounder with above-market growth and relatively clean cash conversion.
- Comparable output · VND 76.2k-77.1k/share
- Selected peer multiples imply only modest upside because public markets apply a more conservative near-term multiple than the DCF terminal case.
- Valuation spread · Approx. 8%-9%
- The spread is driven by duration. The more confidence one has in FPT’s long runway, the more weight the DCF deserves.
Executive view
FPT is a higher-quality growth company than the cyclical industrial names, so a FCFF DCF is appropriate. The valuation captures sustained IT services demand, telecom cash flow, education growth, and a cleaner margin profile.
The DCF is intentionally above the comparable output. That is the right direction for a quality growth company: a DCF can capture multi-year compounding, while public comparable analysis is constrained by today’s peer multiples.
The DCF is still not the old aggressive case. The terminal exit multiple is 8.5x, not 14.0x, and the WACC remains 10.5%. The model therefore shows moderate upside rather than a stretched growth-stock valuation.
Comparable analysis is used as the reality check. It trims high-growth peer outliers and asks where FPT should trade if investors apply selected public tech/telecom P/E medians today.
Key assumptions
- DCF model
- FCFF DCF
- Unlevered free cash flow is discounted at WACC. This is not a DDM because dividends are not the main value driver for the growth case.
- Discount rate / terminal value
- WACC 10.5%; exit EV/EBITDA 8.5x
- The terminal multiple is high enough to recognize FPT’s growth quality but low enough to avoid the old stretched valuation case. This is why DCF sits above comparable value without becoming unrealistic.
- Operating case
- Revenue growth 12.0% to 8.0%
- The model assumes growth moderates but remains structurally above more cyclical sectors.
- Comparable set
- Tech, IT services, telecom peers
- Selected peer medians of 14.0x LTM, 12.9x 2026E, and 11.7x 2027E provide the public-market sanity check after trimming high-growth outliers.
- Why methods differ
- DCF higher; comps lower
- DCF capitalizes FPT’s growth runway and cash-flow compounding. Comparable analysis reflects where listed peers trade today, so it should be lower and less optimistic.
DCF sensitivity
How the DCF value moves with the discount rate and the exit multiple
| WACC ↓ · Exit EV/EBITDA → | 7.5x | 8.0x | 8.5x | 9.0x | 9.5x |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.5% | 78.6 | 82.8 | 86.9 | 91.0 | 95.2 |
| 10.0% | 76.9 | 81.0 | 85.0 | 89.1 | 93.1 |
| 10.5% | 75.3 | 79.3 | 83.2 | 87.2 | 91.1 |
| 11.0% | 73.7 | 77.6 | 81.4 | 85.3 | 89.2 |
| 11.5% | 72.1 | 75.9 | 79.7 | 83.5 | 87.3 |
Outlined cell: model base case. Green cells sit above, red cells below, the 74.2k price used on 11 Jun 2026 (unshaded within ±2%; darker beyond ±10%).
Recomputed from the DCF workbook: the same unlevered free cash flows, mid-year discounting, net debt and share count, with only WACC and the exit multiple flexed. The centre cell is the model output.
Conclusion
FPT now shows the intended split: DCF is the growth-upside case, while comparable analysis is the tighter public-market multiple check.
FPT is the case where a method spread is especially important. If the report only showed a single market-consistent price, it would hide the difference between near-term public multiples and long-duration intrinsic value.
Investors who believe FPT can sustain growth in IT services, education, and telecom cash flow should pay more attention to the DCF output.
Investors who want to anchor on what the market pays for comparable listed peers today should use the comparable range as the practical check.
The final read is constructive but not extreme: the model supports upside, but most of that upside comes from believing in growth duration rather than from today’s peer multiples alone.
Risks and checks
- 1 A lower terminal multiple has a large impact because the company is valued as a duration growth asset.
- 2 IT-services growth, wage pressure, FX, and overseas demand are the main operating sensitivities.
- 3 Comparable valuation can compress if global technology multiples derate.
- 4 If education or telecom cash flow underperforms, the DCF premium over comparable analysis would narrow.
- 5 A higher WACC would reduce the value of later-year cash flows and pull DCF closer to the comparable range.
Model files
-
One-page tear sheet
PDF · 189 KB · A4
Outputs against the price used, key assumptions, conclusion and risks on one page. Printable web version.
-
DCF
XLSX · 393 KB · 11 Jun 2026
Sheets: DCF, NWC, WACC, A1, A2.
-
Comparable Analysis
XLSX · 1.5 MB · 11 Jun 2026
Sheets: List, Benchmarking 1, Benchmarking 2, Ouput, TargetCo, CompCo 1-15.