The NII portion was subscribed 26%, while retail investors’ category was subscribed 17%. Qualified institutional buyers (QIBs) stayed away from the issue for now.
The company has fixed a price band of Rs 33-35 per share and investors can bid for 428 shares and in multiples thereof.
According to market sources, Udayshivakumar Infra shares are commanding a premium of Rs 10 in the unlisted market, which is higher than the previous day.
Analysts are mixed on whether investors should subscribe to the issue given muted market sentiments.
Prashanth Tapse of Mehta Equities says Udayshivakumar Infra IPO, being a micro market cap company, would find it difficult to get a healthy response from all investor categories.
Tapse said conservative investors should avoid subscribing to the issue, citing key risks such as potential inconsistency in financial performance and downsize in GST recovery.According to analysts, the issue is fully priced in, discounting all the near-term growth potential for a company.
Meanwhile, Dilip Davda, a Sebi-registered analyst, recommends investors to subscribe to the issue for the long term, despite warnings about the highly competitive nature of the business and margin uncertainty in the future.
Udayshivakumar Infra is engaged in the business of construction of various road projects, including national and state highways, district roads and smart roads under PM’s smart city mission projects etc.
The company has 46 work orders in hand, having an aggregate order book value of Rs 1,291 crore, as of the December quarter. Out of which, 30 are ongoing and 16 are new work orders which are yet to start.
Udayshivakumar Infra clocked a revenue of Rs 185 crore in FY22, while profit stood at Rs 12 crore. Over FY20-22, it has seen a mixed growth trend, wherein revenue de-grew by 2.1% CAGR while EBITDA was flat and PAT grew by 7.6% CAGR.
Saffron Capital Advisors is the lead book running manager and MAS Services is the registrar to the issue.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of Economic Times)
