CMR Green Tech's volume math doesn't add up: 80,381 MT vs implied 408,000 MT
A critical metric for modeling—FY26 volume—was reported as 80,381 MT, but the same call's per-ton profit numbers point to a far larger figure. The contradiction was left unexplained.
What's new
- FY26 volume reported as 80,381 MT, but PAT per ton of ₹5,580 on ₹228 cr PAT implies >408,000 MT.
- Q4FY26 revenue ₹2,364 cr, up 45% YoY; EBITDA ₹128 cr, up 160%.
- Capacity target 7 lakh MT by end-FY27 from 6.15 lakh MT, with ₹200 cr capex.
- Beverage can recycling plant at Khurda now operational, supplying Hindalco.
Themes from the call
Demand
Reported 24% volume growth to 80,381 MT, but per-ton metrics from CFO imply a much larger base, casting doubt on actual demand trajectory.
Margins
EBITDA per ton ₹11,400; PAT per ton ₹5,580. If volume is understated, these margins are overstated, making margin analysis unreliable.
Capital allocation
₹200 cr capex for FY27 to expand capacity; IPO raised ₹630 cr via offer for sale, not for company use.
Guidance watch
- FY27 volume growth expected similar to FY26 (~25%), but no specific target given.
- Capacity to ~7 lakh MT by end-FY27.
- EBITDA per ton improvement to continue from ₹11,000-11,400 base.
- Refused to guide on FY27 specific EBITDA per ton or margin percentages.
Risk flags
- Internal volume reporting discrepancy: 80,381 MT vs implied 408,000 MT from per-ton PAT. Modeling risk.
- Guidance is directional only; no specific volume or revenue numbers for FY27.
- Scrap sourcing risks from EU export restrictions (15% duty from Sep 2026, ban to non-OECD from May 2027).
Key quotes
-
"FY26 total volume increased by 24% to 80,381 metric tons"
— Director of Business Development, Jul 2026 call -
"Consolidated PAT was 228 crores; on a per-ton basis, PAT is ₹5,580 per ton"
— CFO, Jul 2026 call
The brief
CMR Green Tech's Jul 2026 call had two numbers for FY26 volume that cannot both be true. The Director of Business Development said 80,381 MT. The CFO's per-ton PAT of ₹5,580 applied to ₹228 cr PAT gives volume exceeding 408,000 MT—a fivefold gap. Management did not explain the difference. That makes every per-ton metric in the call suspect. If the real volume is 408,000 MT, the reported 24% growth becomes a 6% decline instead. Investors cannot model the company without resolving this. Underneath the confusion, the business story shows revenue up 30% to ₹8,646 cr, EBITDA up 50% to ₹449 cr, and a 45% share of the automotive secondary aluminum market. The company is diversifying into beverage cans and billets, targeting 7 lakh MT capacity by end-FY27. Guidance is directional—no hard numbers for volume or margin in FY27—and scrap sourcing faces regulatory headwinds from the EU. But the immediate issue is the volume discrepancy. Until CMR explains which number is correct, the growth narrative rests on a mathematical contradiction.
CMR's numbers don't match. Investors need a clean explanation before the growth story can be underwritten.