GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS Fair Value

GLENMARK · Healthcare · Current price ₹2,226.7

Full stock page
DocStoX fair value
₹1,403
low confidence · 45/100
Current price
₹2,419
Upside to fair value
-42.0%
Estimate range
₹702 – ₹2,275
Quality score
5.5 / 10
Model it yourself — Margin of Safety Calculator
Opens pre-filled with GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS's latest numbers.

Is GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS undervalued?

We estimate the fair value of GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS at ₹1,403 per share, against a market price of ₹2,419. That puts the share price about -42.0% above our estimate, at low confidence. This is our view of what the business is worth, not a target price or a forecast of where the share price will go.

How this fair value is calculated

This estimate comes from 2 methods: Discounted cash flow (2-stage) (₹532), Fair multiple (P/E) (₹2,275). These methods disagree materially, so the estimate is their midpoint rather than a weighted blend, and the disagreement is part of the finding. The full working, including the assumptions and what data was missing, is set out below.

The range around this estimate

Our estimate for GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS spans ₹702 to ₹2,275. That range is wide, which is the honest signal here: read the range rather than the single number. A margin of safety means buying meaningfully below the estimate: the wider the range, the more room the assumptions leave for error.

How we got this fair value

Every number below is part of the same estimate for GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS. Nothing here is a target price or a forecast of where the share price will go.

Low confidence45/100floor: no better than this

The inputs are thin or the models disagree sharply. This is our least reliable kind of estimate, so read the range rather than the single number.

Estimate range ₹702 – ₹2,275

Why this method for this business

DCF and relative PE are the most appropriate models for a pharmaceutical company like Glenmark, which has a durable moat and predictable cash flows.

The models behind the number

These methods disagree materially, so the estimate is their plain midpoint rather than a weighted blend. The disagreement is itself the finding.

Discounted cash flow (2-stage)
₹532equal weight

Intrinsic value from 2-stage discounted cash flows (primary for asset-light / normal businesses); FCFE path

Fair multiple (P/E)
₹2,275equal weight
  • ev_ebitda is not used due to lack of clear EV/EBITDA multiples for the sector

What was missing

  • Lack of detailed capital allocation data
  • Limited analyst coverage for precise multiple estimation

What drives it

27 inputs, grouped by how strong each claim is
ReportedRead from filings or market data. Verifiable, not our opinion.
FCF_0 (normalized)
1,053 ₹cr

fcf_norm (median ≤5y positive)

Net debt
-580.7 ₹cr

total_debt − cash

Sector-median P/E
33.39×

peer-median

Peers used
28

peer-median

EPS (TTM)
63.71 ₹/share

computed

Own-history median P/E
27.52×

reconstructed (one feature, dampened — not a cap)

MacroEconomy-wide input, not company-specific.
Discount rate (r)
13.28%

COE (building-block)

Beta
0.85

bottom-up industry

AssumptionA forward input the model chose. Reasonable people can disagree here.
Stage-1 start growth
7.02%

pat_cagr_5y

Fade shape
linear

lifecycle Growth

Terminal growth (g)
5.39%

macro terminal × quality premium

Stage-1 years
10 y

lifecycle Growth horizon

JudgementOur read of the evidence, not a measurement.
Lifecycle stage
Growth

forecast engine (L20)

Quality premium
1.078×

moat Narrow + capital allocation

Term: quality
-4.8%

quality 45/100 (weak/erratic returns) → discount

Term: growth
+0.4%

~8% CAGR (ROCE 15% > hurdle) → neutral

Term: capital_allocation
+6.6%

capital allocation: rising ROCE funded by strong FCF → premium

Term: financial_strength
+9.4%

financial strength: effectively debt-free → premium

Term: history
-5.3%

history: market paid -18% vs sector, dampened ×0.3 (one feature, not the anchor)

Term: sector_rerating
+0.0%

sector re-rating: no sector-norm history → not used

Term: rate_regime
+1.2%

rates: risk-free 6.9% below ~7.1% normal → higher multiple

Term: risk
+0.0%

risk: no analyst-dispersion signal available → neutral (lowers confidence, not PE)

DerivedFalls out of the inputs above: a model output, not an independent input.
Path
FCFE

computed (D/E vs 0.8)

Terminal-value fraction
0.492

PV_TV / (PV_1+PV_TV)

Premium vs sector
+6.9%

fundamentals + macro (not capped at own history)

Fair-multiple confidence
74%

data completeness + term agreement

Fair P/E
35.71×

sector median × ∏(1+term) — Dynamic Fair Multiple

Who computed this

A language model (qwen3:8b) selects the valuation method and the judgement inputs for GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS: which models suit the business, the moat, the growth and margin assumptions. It does not produce the number. The fair value itself is computed in Python by a deterministic engine (version 2026.08.1) from those inputs, so the same inputs always give the same result and every figure above can be traced to a source.

Estimated 14 Sept 2026. Re-run as new financials and news arrive.

How we value stocks

We estimate what a business is worth from its own economics: cash flows, returns on capital, and a multiple justified by its quality, rather than from where the share price has been. A fair value estimate is a view, not a verdict, and it is only as good as the inputs listed above.

Read the full fair-value methodology

More on GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS

DocStoX estimates are computed from reported financials, for informational purposes only, not investment advice. Consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.