Menu

Author Archives: Equity Right

From Mumbai to the World: Equity Right’s Climb to the Global Top 3

From Mumbai to the World: Equity Right’s Climb to the Global Top 3

From Mumbai to the World: Equity Right’s Climb to the Global Top 3

In a digital world crowded with investment apps and trading tools, carving out a meaningful space without external funding is rare. Yet Equity Right, founded in Mumbai in 2015, has built a strong reputation for independent equity research and advisory, despite being fully self funded.

According to Tracxn, *Equity Right is ranked 3rd among 16 global competitors in its category*, positioned alongside companies from: *Canada (UltraTrader, TraderSync), Germany (Edgewonk), Brazil (Guru), and United States (Stocks+ App, The Trading Buddy, Wise Tradr)*. This isn’t just a ranking, it’s a validation of a decade-long journey powered by consistency, credibility, and sheer bootstrap grit.

Equity Right’s #3 global ranking comes purely from its product strength, user traction, and consistent research quality, not marketing or funding.

The firm’s research desk has delivered an average CAGR of approximately 28%, driven by recommendations such as PFC, REC, HUDCO and Keynes Technologies and many more. Equity Right currently manages an AUM of ₹~440 crore, supported by a steadily expanding investor base across HNIs, family offices, and institutions.

While not a merchant banker, quite a few IPO ready companies have been guided by the Equity Right team. Equity Right has been participant in multiple stock placements with top domestic institutions and leading fund houses. The firm has participated in transactions totalling over ₹1,500 crore over last 5 years.

The firm offers a comprehensive range of research-driven services, including equity research reports, results updates, IPO research, and coverage of corporate and sectoral trends. It also delivers daily market news, expert views, and analysis across currencies and commodities. Its platform features a dedicated investor forum, real estate research, including property rates, top picks, expert opinions, and news.

Equity Right being “unfunded” simply means it has grown entirely through its own discipline, decisions, and user trust. It reflects the long-term, research-first vision of founder Gaurav Daptardar, who built the platform from a small idea into a respected global competitor.

Under the leadership of Gaurav Daptardar, Equity Right’s expansion into investment banking, wealth management, PMS, and full-spectrum research marks a notable milestone for an independently built firm operating across both buy and sell sides.

To summarise, Equity Right’s rise is a story of patience, expertise, and purpose, a budding research house from Mumbai quietly proving that consistent quality can achieve global success.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

HAL Q2 FY26: Revenue ₹6,628 Crore (+11%), PAT ₹1,662 Crore (+11.6%) — Margin Pressure Visible

HAL Q2 FY26: Revenue ₹6,628 Crore (+11%), PAT ₹1,662 Crore (+11.6%) — Margin Pressure Visible

HAL Q2 FY26: Revenue ₹6,628 Crore (+11%), PAT ₹1,662 Crore (+11.6%) — Margin Pressure Visible

HAL Q2 FY26: Revenue ₹6,628 Crore (+11%), PAT ₹1,662 Crore (+11.6%) — Margin Pressure Visible

HAL delivered steady revenue growth at ₹6,62,846 lakh (₹6,628 crore, +11% YoY) and a profit of ₹1,66,252 lakh (₹1,662 crore, +11.6% YoY) in Q2 FY26. However, EBITDA margin contracted, indicating early signs of cost pressure.

*Detailed Quarterly Overview*
* Revenue from operations: ₹6,62,846 lakh vs ₹5,97,655 lakh in Q2 FY25
→ YoY growth: +10.9%
* Sequential (QoQ) growth: from ₹4,81,914 lakh in Q1 FY26
→ +37.5% QoQ, reflecting higher execution and deliveries.
* Other Income: Other income rose to ₹88,894 lakh (vs ₹54,400 lakh YoY)
→ Driven by higher treasury income, interest, and miscellaneous credits.
* Total Income: ₹7,51,740 lakh (vs ₹6,52,055 lakh YoY).
→ +15.3% YoY growth.

*Expense Breakdown — Where Margins Got Pressured*
* Cost of materials consumed: ₹4,07,204 lakh
* Employee benefit expenses: ₹1,33,187 lakh
* Other expenses: ₹51,525 lakh
* Provisions: ₹51,731 lakh
* Depreciation & amortisation: ₹22,540 lakh
* Finance cost: ₹34 lakh
* Total gross expenses: ₹5,63,331 lakh
* ⁠Capital-related adjustments: ₹33,636 lakh
* Net expenses: ₹5,29,695 lakh

*Why margins tightened*
* Material cost increased sharply in line with execution.
* Employee cost rose due to pension and wage-related adjustments.
* Provisions jumped to ₹51,731 lakh (vs ₹25,074 lakh YoY), cutting operating margin.
Together, these factors caused EBITDA margin contraction despite higher revenues.

*Profitability Analysis*
* Profit Before Tax (PBT): ₹2,22,045 lakh vs ₹1,99,668 lakh YoY
→ 11.2% YoY growth
* Tax Expense: ₹55,793 lakh (Q2 FY26)
* Profit After Tax (PAT): ₹1,66,252 lakh vs ₹1,49,036 lakh YoY
→ +11.6% YoY
* QoQ growth from ₹1,37,715 lakh
→ +20.7% QoQ
* Basic & diluted EPS: ₹24.86 (vs ₹22.28 YoY)

*Balance Sheet Highlights (as of 30 Sept 2025)*
1. Assets
– Total Assets: ₹1,22,97,854 lakh
– Non-current assets: ₹16,71,693 lakh
– Current assets: ₹1,06,26,161 lakh
– Inventories surged to ₹28,41,990 lakh (vs ₹21,67,570 lakh in Mar 2025). This indicates build-up for future execution.
2. Cash & Bank Balances
– Cash & cash equivalents: ₹3,13,774 lakh
– Bank balances: ₹41,32,219 lakh
3. Liabilities & Net Worth
* Equity
– Share capital: ₹33,439 lakh
– Other equity: ₹36,62,813 lakh
– Total equity: ₹36,96,252 lakh
* Liabilities
– Total liabilities: ₹86,01,602 lakh
– Non-current liabilities: ₹37,57,725 lakh
– Current liabilities: ₹48,43,877 lakh
– Other current liabilities: ₹32,10,651 lakh

*Cash Flow (H1 FY26)*
* Operating Cash Flow (OCF): Positive ₹7,38,156 lakh
→ Strong collections + working capital movements
* Investing Cash Flow: Negative ₹7,78,408 lakh
→ Heavy investment in capex, intangibles (₹35,587 lakh) and large bank deposits (₹7,69,836 lakh)
* Financing Cash Flow: Negative ₹1,00,667 lakh
→ Due to dividend payout

*Key Disclosures from Management and Auditors*
* Pension cost impact: Additional employee cost due to pension contribution revision: ₹2,175 lakh
* Salary refixation case: Recovery adjustments for workmen: ₹1,193 lakh recognized.
* Inventory flood loss revision: Earlier inventory loss reversed partly; final loss retained: ₹3,664 lakh.
* FPQ (pricing) still provisional: FY24 & FY25 prices pending final approval; sales recognized based on provisional indices.

*Caveats and catalysts*
* Positives
– Strong revenue and PAT growth
– High operational cash generation
– Big inventory buildup signals strong order execution in coming quarters
– Strong liquidity (huge bank balances)
* Concerns
– Margin contraction due to higher material & provision costs
– Pricing uncertainty due to pending FPQ finalisation
– Employee cost volatility due to pension and wage adjustments
– Large working capital requirement as inventory climbs

*Conclusion*
HAL delivered a solid Q2 FY26 with 11% revenue growth and 11.6% PAT growth, backed by higher execution and better collections. However, operating margins fell as costs and provisions increased sharply. Going forward, margin recovery, FPQ pricing finalisation, and inventory management will be key things to watch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Reliance Q2 FY26: Gross Revenue ₹2.83 Lakh Crore, EBITDA +14.6% — Retail & Digital Drive Growth

Reliance Q2 FY26: Gross Revenue ₹2.83 Lakh Crore, EBITDA +14.6% — Retail & Digital Drive Growth

Reliance Q2 FY26: Gross Revenue ₹2.83 Lakh Crore, EBITDA +14.6% — Retail & Digital Drive Growth

Reliance Q2 FY26: Gross Revenue ₹2.83 Lakh Crore, EBITDA +14.6% — Retail & Digital Drive Growth

Reliance reported a strong quarter with consolidated gross revenue of ₹2,83,548 crore, EBITDA of ₹50,367 crore (+14.6% YoY) and consolidated PAT of ₹22,092 crore (+14.3% YoY) — driven mainly by Jio (digital) and Retail momentum.

*Consolidated headline numbers*
* Gross revenue: ₹2,83,548 crore (up 10.0% YoY).
* EBITDA: ₹50,367 crore (up 14.6% YoY).
* Profit before tax (PBT): ₹29,124 crore (up 16.3% YoY).
* Tax: ₹6,978 crore.
* Profit after tax (PAT): ₹22,092 crore (up 14.3% YoY).
* Finance cost: ₹6,827 crore;
* Depreciation: ₹14,416 crore.
These are the consolidated top-line and profitability numbers for Q2 FY26.

*Digital/ Jio Platforms*
* Gross revenue (JPL consolidated): ₹42,652 crore (15% YoY).
* Operating revenue: ₹36,332 crore (14.6% YoY).
* EBITDA: ₹18,757 crore (up 17–18% YoY) with margin expansion (+140 bps).
* Jio milestones: subscribers ~506.4 million, ARPU rose to ₹211.4.
Jio’s improved ARPU, subscriber additions (net add ~8.3 million) and higher monetization were key profit levers this quarter.

*Retail (Reliance Retail Ventures Limited — RRVL)*
* Gross revenue (Retail): ₹90,018 crore (up 18% YoY).
* Net revenue: ₹79,128 crore; EBITDA from operations: ₹6,624 crore; Total EBITDA: ₹6,816 crore (up ~16.5% YoY).
Retail also reported 369 million registered customers and 19,821 stores (412 new stores opened in the quarter). Festive demand and faster adoption of quick commerce lifted volumes.

*Oil-to-Chemicals (O2C)*
* Revenue: ₹160,558 crore (small YoY uptick ~3.2%).
* EBITDA: ₹15,008 crore (up ~21% YoY); EBITDA margin improved ~130 bps to 9.3% — supported by better fuel cracks, higher domestic fuel placement and commodity delta improvements.

*Exploration & Production (E&P)*
Revenue and EBITDA were steady-to-low single-digit changes; production volumes and price realizations mixed across blocks.

*Balance sheet & cash flow signals*
* Capex during the quarter: ₹40,010 crore (shows heavy investment activity).
* Net debt: moved to ₹118,545 crore (up slightly from ₹117,581 crore).
* Net debt/ LTM EBITDA: ~0.58x — implies the company remains comfortably levered relative to earnings while investing aggressively.

*Risks & catalysts*
* Catalysts: continued Jio ARPU upsides, further traction in quick commerce and festive retail, and improved downstream fuel cracks (helpful for O2C EBITDA). Jio’s scale (500M+ subs) is a structural strength.
* Risks: higher finance costs (Q2 finance cost rose YoY), large recurring capex, and exposure of petrochem margins to global crude/chain dynamics. Also, compare Q2 to Q1 for one-offs — Q1 included proceeds from sale of listed investments that affected sequential comparisons.

*Conclusion*
Reliance posted a broadly solid Q2 FY26: double-digit YoY growth in revenue, EBITDA and PAT, largely led by Jio’s monetisation and Retail’s festive-led growth, while the group continues heavy capex and maintains a moderate net-debt/EBITDA ratio. Investors will watch margin sustainability across O2C and the cash-flow impact of the ongoing investment program.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

HUL Q2 FY26: Revenue Up 2%, PAT Up ~4% Amid GST-Led Disruption

HUL Q2 FY26: Revenue Up 2%, PAT Up ~4% Amid GST-Led Disruption

HUL Q2 FY26: Revenue Up 2%, PAT Up ~4% Amid GST-Led Disruption

HUL Q2 FY26: Revenue Up 2%, PAT Up ~4% Amid GST-Led Disruption

Hindustan Unilever posted a modest quarter: revenue rose about 2% while reported PAT grew ~4% helped by a one-off tax benefit — margins were under pressure and management declared an interim dividend of ₹19 per share.

*What happened this quarter*
* Revenue from operations (consolidated) for Q2 FY26: ₹16,034 crore, up from ₹15,703 crore a year ago (≈ +2% YoY).
* Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) for the quarter: ₹3,729 crore; EBITDA margin: 23.2%, down 90 basis points vs Q2 last year.
* Profit after tax before exceptional items: ₹2,482 crore, down 4% YoY.
* Reported Profit After Tax (PAT, after exceptional items): ₹2,694 crore, up ~4% YoY (consolidated).
* Board declared an interim dividend of ₹19 per share (record date: 7 Nov 2025).

*Detailed numbers (consolidated)*
* Revenue from operations: ₹16,034 crore (Q2 FY26) vs ₹15,703 crore (Q2 FY25).
* Total income (quarter): figures shown in the filing also list components of other income and operating segments (see official table).
* EBITDA: ₹3,729 crore. EBITDA margin: 23.2% (decline of 90 bps YoY).
* Profit before exceptional items (PAT before exceptions): ₹2,482 crore (down 4% YoY).
* Exceptional items (net): one-off +₹273 crore (favourable tax resolution between UK & India), restructuring costs ₹51 crore, and acquisition/ disposal costs ₹38 crore. These swing the pre-exception PAT to the reported PAT.
* Reported PAT (after exceptions): ₹2,694 crore (≈ +4% YoY).
* Basic earnings per share (EPS): ₹11.43 for the quarter (basic).
* Total comprehensive income (quarter): ₹2,698 crore (group level table). Paid up equity: 235 crore shares (face value Re. 1).

*Why revenue was muted and margins fell*
* The filing and the company commentary point to GST-led disruption (rate changes) that affected pricing and demand for a part of the portfolio, which pressured volumes and realizations in the quarter. This is visible in the modest top-line growth despite HUL’s scale.
* Margin contraction (90 bps in EBITDA margin) was because of a mix of higher input/ operational costs, continued investment/marketing spend and the temporary dilution in pricing power related to the GST transition.

*Segment/ cash flow/ other pointers*
* The company’s statement includes segment-level sales and operating data (Home Care, Beauty & Well-being, Personal Care, Foods). The consolidated schedules also show standalone numbers for comparability.
* Cash flows: the cash generated from operations and movement in working capital are shown in the cash flow tables (operating cash flow and taxes paid are disclosed in the filing).

*Segment-wise snapshot*
While the company’s full segment-table for Q2 FY26 is only partially disclosed in the public summary, previous commentary from HUL suggests the following trends (for guidance into Q2):
* The Home Care division has historically grown at low-single to mid-single digit sales growth, with volume growth being stronger than value growth (as the business absorbs input inflation and passes on less pricing).
* The Beauty & Well-being/ Personal Care business has seen better momentum in premiumisation, with moderate unit growth but heavier investment behind brands.
* The Foods & Refreshments segment has been weaker, with demand softness in some categories and cost inflation from commodities like tea and coffee.
* Management commentary (in recent prior quarters) emphasises a shift from margin-first to growth-first: higher brand and trade-spend, more focus on digital & e-commerce channels.

*Outlook and what management has signalled*
HUL has stated it expects consumer demand to gradually improve through FY26, buoyed by lower commodity inflation, improving rural macro trends and continued investment in brand/digital. However, management continues to flag near-term margin pressure due to elevated input costs, trade spend and channel investments. They anticipate volume growth to recover gradually while price growth remains modest.

*Management actions & shareholder returns*
Management approved an interim dividend of ₹19 per share (record date 7 Nov 2025; payment 20 Nov 2025). This signals continued focus on returning cash to shareholders despite the quarter’s headwinds.

*Takeaways*
* Topline: steady but muted — revenue +2% YoY.
* Profit: reported PAT +~4%, helped by a one-off tax benefit; underlying PAT before exceptions down ~4%.
* Margins: under pressure — EBITDA margin down 90 bps to 23.2%.
* Shareholder friendly: interim dividend ₹19/sh.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Gujarat Gas Q2 FY26: Revenue Flat at ~₹3,980 Crore, PAT Down ~9%

Gujarat Gas Q2 FY26: Revenue Flat at ~₹3,980 Crore, PAT Down ~9%

Gujarat Gas Q2 FY26: Revenue Flat at ~₹3,980 Crore, PAT Down ~9%

Gujarat Gas Q2 FY26: Revenue Flat at ~₹3,980 Crore, PAT Down ~9%

Gujarat Gas reported a largely stable quarter on top-line with revenue of ~₹3,979 crore, but profitability slipped — EBITDA at ₹520 crore (vs ₹553 crore) and PAT at ₹281 crore (vs ₹307 crore) for Q2 FY26.

*Headline numbers (company reported — Q2 FY26 vs Q2 FY25)*
* Revenue from operations: ~₹3,979 crore (Q2 FY26) vs ~₹3,949 crore (Q2 FY25).
* EBITDA: ₹520 crore (Q2 FY26) vs ₹553 crore (Q2 FY25).
* PAT (Profit after tax): ₹281 crore (Q2 FY26) vs ₹307 crore (Q2 FY25).

*Operational highlights — volumes & network*
* CNG volume: 3.32 mmscmd in Q2 FY26, up 13% YoY (vs 2.93 mmscmd in Q2 FY25).
* PNG (Domestic): 0.83 mmscmd in Q2 FY26 — +10% YoY.
* PNG (Commercial): 0.16 mmscmd — +7% YoY.
* Total distributed gas: ~8.65 mmscmd in Q2 FY26

*Network & customer metrics*
* CNG stations: 834 operational stations (company added 4 stations in the quarter).
* New domestic customers added in Q2: 42,400+.
* Households served: More than 23.44 lakh households.
* Pipeline network: 43,900+ km of steel pipeline (cumulative).

*Business initiatives mentioned by the company*
* FDODO (Franchise/ dealer) push: Gujarat Gas has signed 74 FDODO agreements to accelerate growth; one FDODO station became operational in Jamnagar during the quarter.
* Corporate action: Shareholders approved the Composite Scheme of Amalgamation and Arrangement at the meeting held on 17th October 2025; the company has filed the Chairman’s Report and confirmation petition with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.

*What the numbers tell us*
1. Volume growth is healthy, especially CNG: CNG volumes grew 13% YoY to 3.32 mmscmd, showing strong consumer and transport demand — this is the positive operational story.
2. Top line is steady, but margins compressed: Revenue was almost flat (≈₹3,979 crore), yet EBITDA and PAT declined (EBITDA ₹520 crore, PAT ₹281 crore), indicating margin pressure or higher costs relative to last year.
3. Retail expansion continues: Network additions (4 new CNG stations) and 42,400+ new domestic connections in a quarter show steady on-ground growth and customer acquisition.
4. FDODO rollout is a focus: Signing 74 FDODO agreements and commissioning a station signals management’s push to scale via franchise models.

*Risks and near-term things to watch*
* Margin drivers: If fuel/ gas costs, spot LNG prices, or allocations change, EBITDA and PAT can move sharply — the quarter already showed profit decline despite volume growth.
* Execution of FDODO roll-out: Success of the franchise model will affect future station additions and cost structure.
* Regulatory/ allocation changes: Any government allocation changes for domestic/ priority segments could affect supply mix and economics.

*Conclusion*
Gujarat Gas delivered stable revenue (~₹3,979 crore) and good volume growth (CNG +13%), but profitability came under pressure with EBITDA at ₹520 crore and PAT at ₹281 crore. The company is expanding its network and pushing an FDODO strategy, but margin sustainability remains the key monitorable for the next quarters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Tata Motors Q2 FY26: Sales Momentum in CVs (94,681 units, +12%), Revenue Growth Modest, Profitability Under Pressure

Tata Motors Q2 FY26: Sales Momentum in CVs (94,681 units, +12%), Revenue Growth Modest, Profitability Under Pressure

Tata Motors Q2 FY26: Sales Momentum in CVs (94,681 units, +12%), Revenue Growth Modest, Profitability Under Pressure

Tata Motors Q2 FY26: Sales Momentum in CVs (94,681 units, +12%), Revenue Growth Modest, Profitability Under Pressure

Tata Motors’ Commercial Vehicles (CV) business showed healthy volume momentum — 94,681 units, up 12% year-on-year — while revenue growth was modest and overall profitability at group/PV levels remained under pressure due to one-off items and underlying losses in passenger vehicles.

*Key numbers at a glance*
* CV volumes: 94,681 units, +12% YoY.
* CV revenue: ₹18.4K crore, +6.6% YoY (reported as ₹18.4K Cr).
* CV EBITDA margin: 12.2%, +150 bps YoY.
* CV EBIT margin: 9.8%, +200 bps YoY.
* CV PBT (bei): ₹1.7K crore for the quarter.
Note: Group/Passenger Vehicles (PV) reported significant one-time notional gains which distort headline profitability for the quarter.

*What influenced the results this quarter*
* Volume strength in CVs: The CV business delivered nearly 95k units, a healthy 12% jump. This shows underlying demand strength in commercial transport and logistics. Higher volumes helped spread fixed costs and improved margins.
* Modest revenue growth: CV revenue grew by ~6.6% to about ₹18.4K crore. Volume gains were partly offset by product mix and realization changes, so top-line expansion was smaller than volume growth.
* Margin improvement in CVs: EBITDA margin rose to 12.2% (+150 bps) and EBIT margin to 9.8% (+200 bps). Management attributes this to higher volumes, favourable realizations and cost efficiencies. These margin gains are meaningful for a volume-driven business.

*Profitability — a mixed story*
* CV profitability improved: PBT (bei) for the CV segment was ₹1.7K crore, reflecting better operating leverage on higher volumes.
* Group/ PV distortions: At the group and passenger vehicle levels the reported profit picture is distorted by exceptional items and notional gains on disposal in PV. Some company releases show very large one-time notional gains that swing reported net profit figures — but these are not cash operating profits. Investors should separate ‘underlying operating profit’ (what the business actually earned from making and selling vehicles) from one-offs.

*Detailed highlights*
* CV volume: 94,681 units (+12% YoY).
* CV revenue: ₹18.4K Cr (+6.6% YoY).
* CV EBITDA margin: 12.2% (+150 bps YoY).
* CV EBIT margin: 9.8% (+200 bps YoY).
* CV PBT (bei): ₹1.7K Cr.
* Passenger Vehicles (PV) — reported extremely large notional gain on disposal in Q2 that led to a jump in reported net profit at the PV group level; excluding that gain PV posted operating losses for the quarter. (Company press release shows the one-time notional gain magnitude; treat it as non-recurring.)

*Overall Interpretation*
* CV business is the bright spot: Strong volumes and better margins mean the CV division is moving in the right direction — more trucks on the road and slightly better profitability per vehicle.
* Group headline profit is confusing: Reported group or PV profits are affected by non-cash, one-off accounting items. So, while headlines may show big profits or swings, the core operating picture (especially for PV) is weaker if you strip out the one-offs.
* Watch next quarters for sustainability: If CV volumes and realizations hold, margins could stay higher; but PV needs structural fixes and the one-off gains will not repeat, so investors should focus on underlying EBIT/EBITDA trends.

*Conclusion*
Tata Motors’ CV business had a good quarter — 94,681 units (+12%), modest revenue growth to ₹18.4K Cr, and improving margins (EBITDA 12.2%, EBIT 9.8%). But the overall company headline profit is hard to read because passenger vehicles reported large non-recurring accounting gains; excluding those, PV operating performance remains weak. So, CV momentum is real and encouraging, but watch the next few quarters to see if the improvement is sustainable at the group level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Why gold funds saw a record weekly inflow — and what it signals for Indian investors

Why gold funds saw a record weekly inflow — and what it signals for Indian investors

Why gold funds saw a record weekly inflow — and what it signals for Indian investors

Why gold funds saw a record weekly inflow — and what it signals for Indian investors

In the week to 24 October 2025 global gold-fund flows surged to an unprecedented level, driven by a mix of macro uncertainty, institutional buying and retail interest. Bank of America data cited by market reporters showed record weekly inflows of $8.7 billion into gold funds as the metal briefly traded above $4,380 per ounce before a profit-taking correction. That rush into paper gold—from ETFs to physically backed funds—reflects a deepening role for gold in diversified portfolios and raises specific implications for Indian investors.

What happened
* Global flows: Bank of America and EPFR data pointed to $8.7bn of net new money into gold funds in the most recent week, part of a multi-month deluge that the report estimated as roughly $50bn of inflows over the past four months—an amount larger than the preceding decade plus. At the same time, spot gold briefly touched cycle highs (reported at $4,381.21/oz) then eased amid position-squaring and a firmer dollar.
* India specifics: Domestically, the gold story is also strong. India’s physically backed gold ETFs recorded their largest monthly net inflow in September 2025 — INR 83.6 billion (≈ US$947m) — and total gold-ETF AUM in India crossed about $10 billion after the big September inflow. Popular ETFs posted large turnover spikes during the Diwali season, underscoring growing retail participation.

Why money rushed into gold — the drivers
1. Macro uncertainty and rate expectations: Markets are pricing uncertainty around global growth and monetary policy cycles. Expectations of eventual Fed easing, persistent geopolitical risk and a weaker U.S. dollar at times make real yields less attractive, boosting gold’s appeal as a hedge. Analysts and banks have been raising medium-term targets for gold, reinforcing investor conviction.
2. Institutional allocations and central bank demand: Large institutional allocations—pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and asset managers—have been rotating small portions of fixed-income/FX allocations into gold. Central bank purchases remain structurally positive for net demand. This combination amplifies ETF flows because ETFs offer an efficient way for institutions to accumulate.
3. Retail and festival demand (India): In India, the Diwali season traditionally lifts retail interest in gold; this year, that cultural demand combined with ETF convenience and weak equity returns pushed investors to paper gold rather than jewellery alone. Higher ETF turnover and market share for some providers show retail adoption of financial gold.
4. Momentum and positioning: Rapid price appreciation created momentum flows and derivative positioning that amplified both the rally and subsequent volatility—hence the sharp inflow numbers followed by an intraday pullback as some participants booked profits.

What the inflows mean for Indian investors
1. Gold’s role as portfolio insurance is rising, but sizing matters. The behaviour seen in October suggests investors view gold more as an uncorrelated ballast than a pure trading vehicle. For long-term portfolios, many advisors suggest modest allocations—commonly 5–10%—to physical gold, gold ETFs, or sovereign gold bonds, depending on goals and liquidity needs. The recent inflows argue for at least reviewing and potentially modestly increasing allocations for risk-off cushioning.
2. Choose the instrument to match the purpose. Physical jewellery suits cultural uses and gifts but carries making charges and inventory premiums. Gold ETFs and sovereign gold bonds (SGBs) offer lower transaction cost, better price transparency, and—critically—no making charges; SGBs also pay fixed interest. For portfolio exposure and trading, ETFs are efficient; for long-term savings with some yield, SGBs may be preferable.
3. Be mindful of timing and volatility. Rapid flows create short-term volatility, as the mid-week pullback demonstrated. Investors chasing a top risk buying at elevated prices; a disciplined approach (staggered buying/rupee cost averaging or using SIPs into gold ETFs) reduces timing risk.
4. Macro and currency exposure matter for India. Gold’s INR price depends on the dollar price and rupee movements. A weakening rupee amplifies domestic gold gains; conversely, a stronger rupee cushions Indian buyers. Monitor FX trends when evaluating domestic returns.

Risks and caveats
While inflows signal strong demand, they also crowd markets. Rapid, concentrated ETF buying can reverse quickly if macro signals change—e.g., surprise hawkish central bank moves, a strong dollar, or a rapid equity rebound that lures risk capital back. Investors should avoid over-concentration and treat recent record inflows as both a trend signal and a volatility warning.

Conclusion
The record weekly inflows into gold funds in late October 2025 reflect a structural shift: gold is being adopted both as portfolio insurance by institutions and an accessible investment by retail in markets such as India. For Indian investors, the takeaway is pragmatic—gold deserves a place in diversified allocations, but instrument choice, allocation sizing, and a disciplined entry strategy are essential to manage valuation and timing risks. The scale of recent flows reinforces gold’s strategic role but also warns of heightened short-term price swings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Sustainable transition and energy security: investment implications for Indian utilities and grid players

Sustainable transition and energy security: investment implications for Indian utilities and grid players

Sustainable transition and energy security: investment implications for Indian utilities and grid players

Sustainable transition and energy security: investment implications for Indian utilities and grid players

India’s energy landscape is in simultaneous transition and tension: record renewable additions are reshaping the generation mix even as thermal fuel volatility and rising peak demand keep energy security squarely on policy and corporate agendas. For utilities, grid owners and institutional investors (including pension funds), the practical question is how to balance exposure to high-growth renewable cash flows with the capex, liquidity and tariff risks that come from managing a grid still dependent on coal and peaking fuels. This article analyses the current facts, financial metrics to monitor and investment implications as of 24 October 2025.

The facts: capacity, demand and fuel prices
India added a record quantum of renewables in 2025: JMK/industry tallies show about 34.4 GW of renewables (≈29.5 GW solar, ~4.96 GW wind) installed in January–September 2025, taking total renewable capacity to roughly 247 GW and lifting the renewable share of installed capacity to about 48.3% by Q2 2025. At the same time, seasonal demand remains material: peak demand around Diwali 2025 was reported near 180.1 GW (mildly below 2024 peaks), and several states forecast further increases into winter. Thermal fuel costs are elevated versus historical averages — API2 thermal coal futures traded in the low-to-mid $90s/tonne in October 2025 — keeping generation costs and short-term procurement bills sensitive to global coal moves.

Investment-relevant metrics to watch
1. Capacity utilisation/ PLF (for thermal fleets): NTPC reported coal-plant PLFs around 76.3% in H1 (notably above the national average of ~70.6%), showing residual reliance on coal for baseload and system balancing. Declining PLFs squeeze fixed-cost recovery on thermal assets and pressure margins for merchant plants.
2. Transmission and distribution capex: POWERGRID and other transmission players are scaling capex to handle renewables-led flows; PGCIL’s FY26 capex guidance is in the range of ₹28,000 crore (revised budgets and project pipeline), which will factor into regulated asset bases and future tariff determinations. Capital intensity and regulated returns dictate investor returns in transmission.
3. Fuel cost pass-through/ tariff design: Regulators’ willingness to permit fuel cost pass-through (short-term power purchases, coal/gas price adjustments) directly affects utilities’ margin volatility. Recent CERC orders and state filings show active use of pass-through mechanisms for specific cases. Where pass-through is limited, distributors face margin squeeze and higher working-capital needs.
4. Project capex per MW and financing mix: Large renewable developers (for example, Adani Green targeting 5 GW additions in FY26 with ~₹31,000 crore capex guidance) show the scale of investment required; financing costs and availability of low-cost long tenor debt materially change project IRRs. Investors should model project level DSCRs and refinancing risk.

Short- and medium-term tradeoffs for utilities and grids
Fast renewable growth reduces average generation cost over time but increases intra-day volatility and the need for firming capacity (storage, gas peakers, pumped hydro) and stronger transmission (HVDC links, regional reinforcements). That in turn lifts near-term capex needs for transmission owners and raises operating complexity for discoms that must manage higher ramping and scheduling costs. Where coal prices spike or shipping/logistics disrupt supplies, short-term procurement bills rise — often visible in costly short-term power purchases by states (MSEDCL estimated spot procurements under ₹5.5/unit ceiling in some emergency procurements). These dynamics affect working capital, tariff petitions and receivables cycles.

Financial implications and ratios investors should monitor
* Regulated Asset Base (RAB) growth and allowed RoE for transmission: For transmission investors, look at capex-to-RAB conversion timelines and allowed returns; rising capex should ideally be matched with clear tariff schedules.
* PLF and heat-rate trends for thermal producers: A falling PLF with the same fixed costs reduces EBITDA margin and raises leverage ratios (Net Debt / EBITDA). NTPC’s relatively high PLF is a buffer, but merchant and smaller thermal players may see Net Debt/EBITDA stress if utilisation declines.
* Working capital days and receivable turn for discoms: Higher short-term purchases and seasonal peaks can blow up payables/receivables; monitor Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) and state government support lines.
* Project-level IRR sensitivity to interest rate shifts: With sizeable capex (Adani Green’s FY26 capex guidance ~₹31,000 crore/ US$3.6bn), even modest increases in finance costs reduce levered returns; track debt mix (project loans vs. bonds) and hedging.

Allocation ideas for institutional investors (pension funds/ long-term investors)
1. Core regulated transmission exposure: Transmission utilities with clear capex pipelines and tariff visibility (e.g., POWERGRID/PGCIL) can offer low-volatility, regulated cash flows; monitor RAB growth and regulatory lag.
2. Brown-to-green transition plays: Integrated utilities/IPP groups that pair renewables capacity with storage and merchant offtake contracts can capture premium returns but need careful project and counterparty credit analysis. Adani Green and other large renewable platform rollouts illustrate scale but also execution and funding risk.
3. Distressed-to-restructuring opportunities in thermal: If thermal capacity faces structural demand declines, there may be selective value in assets with repowering/retrofitting optionality or in firms with strong balance-sheet flexibility. Model residual value and environmental compliance capex.

Conclusion
India’s clean-energy rollout has reached a scale that changes the investment calculus: renewables now account for nearly half of installed capacity and are driving large-scale capex in generation and transmission. But coal-price volatility, persistent peak demand and distributional stresses mean energy security and grid investment remain critical. Institutional investors should combine regulated-asset exposure (for stability) with selective project-level renewable investments (for yield), while rigorously modelling fuel, tariff and financing sensitivities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

The growing role of private equity in defence: a $150bn rethink for the U.S. Army

From Mumbai to the World: Equity Right’s Climb to the Global Top 3

The growing role of private equity in defence: a $150bn rethink for the U.S. Army

The growing role of private equity in defence: a $150bn rethink for the U.S. Army

In September-October 2025 the U.S. Army began formal talks with major private-equity groups to help finance an estimated $150 billion programme to modernise infrastructure and fast-track defence-technology capabilities. Facing a large funding gap (reported as roughly $135 billion shortfall against initial plans), Army leaders and Treasury officials have openly courted buyout and infrastructure investors to design public-private partnership (PPP) structures, asset swaps and concession models that could accelerate delivery while transferring some execution risk to private owners.

Why private equity — and why now?
Three converging forces explain the Army’s pivot. First, political momentum in Washington has delivered large appropriations and high-profile defence bills — including packages that free up procurement and investment levers — increasing the scale of planned programmes but exposing financing gaps. Second, private capital sits on tens to hundreds of billions of “dry powder” and faces mounting pressure to deploy: buyout dry powder alone is estimated at about $1.2 trillion, while broader private-markets liquidity measures point to over $2 trillion available for deployment across private equity, credit and infrastructure. That capital is searching for yield and durable cash flows—characteristics many defence infrastructure projects can provide. Third, a shift in procurement models at the Pentagon toward faster, outcome-oriented contracting (e.g., pilot programmes, concession arrangements and “asset monetisation”) lowers political and legal friction for PPPs.

What forms might private capital take?
Private capital can plug into defence modernisation through several structures:
* Concession deals where private investors fund, operate and maintain bases, logistics hubs or data centres under long-term contracts.
* Build-to-suit and availability-payment models that shift upfront capex to the private partner in exchange for a stream of government payments.
* Joint ventures for critical manufacturing (for example, magnet or semiconductor fabs) where private equity provides capex and industrial partners supply know-how.
* Structured financing and asset swaps, where under-utilised military land or facilities are exchanged for services or outputs. Army leaders have explicit interest in creative proposals that deliver capability rather than simple cash injections.

The economics for private investors
Defence infrastructure projects can deliver predictable, inflation-linked cashflows—an attractive profile for private funds that face low public bond yields and compressed return prospects in some sectors. For buyout and infrastructure funds, the appeal is twofold: the prospect of long-dated, indexed revenue streams that match institutional investor liabilities; and potential government credit enhancement (guarantees, concessional loans or availability payments) that improve project leverage economics. With buyout dry powder estimated at ~$1.2tn, large managers (and consortia) have both the scale and the incentive to pursue multi-billion dollar mandates. At the same time, private capital typically demands higher hurdle rates than public borrowing — investors will price in political and regulatory risk, pushing the need for contractual clarity on revenue mechanics and termination rights.

Strategic and governance risks
Bringing Wall Street into national security invites scrutiny. Key risks include operational security (safeguarding classified activity on leased sites), foreign-ownership sensitivities, long-term political risk (contract renewals and policy reversals), and reputational exposure if private owners prioritise returns over readiness. Equally important is competition policy: concentrated ownership of key defence suppliers by large PE houses could raise antitrust and national-security questions. Policymakers are therefore discussing guardrails — transparency, approved-vendor lists and retained sovereign control over critical functions — as prerequisites for larger deals.

Market signals and private-markets appetite
Private-markets specialist commentary and recent fund activity indicate a rising appetite for defence: several buyout houses have publicly signalled interest and deployed record European capital this year, while specialist funds targeted at defence and critical supply-chains are raising dedicated pools. That said, fundraising across private markets slowed in 2024–25 compared with the boom years, increasing emphasis on win-rate, operational value-add and sponsor-LP alignment. The basic arithmetic — abundant dry powder versus attractive, government-backed cashflows — explains why PE is now a central part of the Army’s funding conversation.

Investment implications and what to watch next
For investors and advisers the development creates two avenues: Direct private-markets exposure via infrastructure and defence-focused funds or co-investments that bid for Army projects; and Public-market plays through contractors and suppliers that could benefit from faster project execution and private-sector capex (watch revenue guidance, backlog growth and margin outlooks). Critical near-term indicators to monitor include the legal frameworks Congress adopts for PPPs, the Army’s shortlist of project types (barracks, datacentres, industrial plants), and the structure of any credit enhancement (guarantees or availability payments) that improves project bankability. Also watch how major firms (Apollo, Carlyle, KKR, Cerberus) position capital and disclose allocations to defence or national-security infrastructure.

Conclusion
The Army’s outreach to private equity over a $150 billion programme marks a material shift: budget shortfalls, political will for faster modernisation, and abundant private capital have aligned to create a plausible public-private financing paradigm for defence. The promise is faster delivery and off-balance-sheet mobilisation of resources; the peril is a complex governance and security landscape that requires carefully designed guardrails. For investors, the opportunity is significant but contingent on contractual clarity, acceptable risk-adjusted returns, and the willingness of policymakers to enshrine protections for national security while harnessing private finance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Oil market on edge: Surplus builds, trade talks loom — how energy markets are responding

Oil market on edge: Surplus builds, trade talks loom — how energy markets are responding

Oil market on edge: Surplus builds, trade talks loom — how energy markets are responding

Oil market on edge: Surplus builds, trade talks loom — how energy markets are responding

On 21 October 2025 Brent crude traded around US$60–61/bbl while U.S. WTI sat near US$57–58/bbl, after both benchmarks slipped to multi-month lows amid growing supply concerns. Over the past month Brent has fallen roughly 8–9% and is down about 20% year-to-date, signalling a meaningful reassessment of near-term demand vs supply. The futures curve has moved into contango (nearer-dated prices below later-dated contracts), a classic signal that traders expect abundant supply and have incentives to store crude for future sale.

The supply story: production ramps and inventory builds
Three structural forces are driving the current oversupply picture. First, OPEC+ has been unwinding voluntary cuts, with plans to lift output (the group’s decisions point to incremental increases such as ~137,000 bpd in recent monthly adjustments and larger step-ups totalling over a million barrels per day across 2025). Second, non-OPEC production (notably Libya, Venezuela and higher U.S. shale responsiveness) has added material volumes; the IEA reports global supply was up substantially year-on-year, contributing to an average market surplus of about 1.9 million barrels per day from January–September 2025. Third, U.S. crude stockpiles printed increases recently (reports noted builds of roughly 1.5 million barrels in a weekly update), reinforcing near-term oversupply.

Demand risk: trade talks and growth uncertainty
Overlaying the supply glut is uncertainty on demand growth, particularly linked to the renewal of U.S.–China trade tensions and headline diplomatic frictions in October 2025. Slower trade and manufacturing activity in China and reduced global trade volumes would dampen oil demand — a risk the market is already pricing. Analysts now debate whether weaker demand growth or continued high production will dominate into 2026; the IEA and EIA scenario work both point to inventory builds persisting into 2026 unless demand surprises positively.

Macro knock-ons: financial market reactions
Lower oil prices have ripple effects: energy sector earnings revisions, pressure on high-yield energy bonds, and potential disinflationary impulses that feed into interest rate and currency markets. Some strategists noted that cheaper oil could lower inflation expectations and push real yields down; others caution that sustained weakness may compress capital spending in the oil sector, with implications for future supply and credit spreads. At the margin, forecasts from major banks project downside to Brent through 2026 (examples include scenarios in the mid-$50s to low-$50s by late 2026). The U.S. EIA’s short-term outlook also models Brent averaging about US$52/bbl in 2026, versus an average near US$69/bbl in 2025 in earlier forecasts — underlining the forward downward adjustment.

Market technicals and where opportunities may arise
1. Storage & contango plays: With a persistent contango, owners of capital and access to storage (or storage-funded trade desks) can earn carry. This is a technical, time-limited opportunity that depends on storage costs and financing.
2. Select upstream exposure on valuation weakness: Producers with low breakevens and strong balance sheets may be attractive on price weakness if one believes supply will eventually tighten. Key screening metrics include breakeven cash costs per barrel, net debt / EBITDA, and 12-month forward EV/EBITDA.
3. Midstream & services with secular cashflows: Pipelines, storage owners, and fee-based midstream assets often offer better downside protection than spot-exposed E&P firms; look for distributable cash flow yields and coverage ratios (e.g., DCF coverage of distributions).
4. Options and volatility strategies: For tactical investors, put spreads or selling covered calls on selected integrated majors can harvest elevated implied volatility while capping downside. Monitor implied vs realized volatility spreads.

Risks and screening checklist
This is a classic “news-driven” environment where headlines (OPEC+ tweaks, trade diplomacy, weekly inventory prints) create rapid repricing. Investors should insist on: (a) balance-sheet strength (net debt / EBITDA under control), (b) low operating breakevens (cash cost per barrel vs current price), (c) management track record on capital discipline, and (d) exposure mix (percent of revenues hedged or fixed vs spot). Models should stress-test scenarios where Brent averages US$50–55 in 2026 and rebound scenarios that push it to US$70+.

Conclusion
As of 21 October 2025, the oil market is tilted toward oversupply and demand uncertainty — driven by incremental OPEC+ supply, higher non-OPEC production, inventory builds, and the economic risks of renewed U.S.–China trade frictions. That combination has pushed prices lower and created tactical opportunities (storage/contango, select financial strategies, and balance-sheet-strong upstream bargains), but any investment must be calibrated to a multi-scenario outlook where prices could remain depressed into 2026 or snap higher if supply discipline returns or demand surprises. Rigorous screening on costs, leverage and cash-flow resilience remains essential.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The image added is for representation purposes only

Air India’s Mega Aircraft Deal: Financing India’s Largest Fleet Expansion via GIFT City and Global Leasing Hubs