Sound Group Inc. (SOGP) Stock Analysis
Sound Group Inc.
▾ What's in the 36/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend). It excludes the Altman Z score, whose retained-earnings input this filer does not report separately. See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read SOGP
We are not publishing an intrinsic value for this one — the section below says exactly why. Everything on this page that comes straight from the filings and the tape is still here; treat the missing valuation as a known gap, not as a verdict on the business.
-
1
Reported earnings & margins ↓
What the company actually reported — unaffected by the valuation being held.
-
2
Balance sheet & book value ↓
Assets, liabilities and equity as filed.
-
3
Who's selling & betting against it ↓
Insider and short-interest behaviour needs no valuation model.
The share count we read for SOGP looks wrong — common for multi-class / founder-controlled filers that report shares per share-class. That makes per-share figures (including intrinsic value) misleading, so we suppressed them. The company's total financials below are sound.
What to use instead: Lean on the totals — revenue, net income, cash flow — and the balance sheet. Multi-class share counts are being corrected; once fixed, the per-share valuation returns automatically.
This note is only about the single DCF fair-value number — SOGP's full financial statements, health scores, and written analysis are all below.
How does SOGP stack up against its closest peers?
We take the 7 same-industry companies most similar to SOGP (similar size) and check what investors are paying for each dollar of their revenue (or profits). If SOGP is much more expensive on the same yardstick, that's a red flag — unless you have a specific reason it deserves a premium. For a leveraged business, EV/EBIT and FCF yield (both in the table) are usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
| EV / SalesEV / Sales — For every $1 of yearly revenue, this is how many dollars investors pay to own the whole business (including debt). Why it matters: Works for pre-profit growth companies where P/E and FCF don't apply. The most apples-to-apples cross-company multiple because it ignores accounting choices. Reference: 1–3x for mature companies · 4–10x for software/SaaS · 10–20x for hypergrowth · >20x is rare and demanding Full explanation → |
2.3x / 3.4x / 10.6x |
| EV / EBITEV / EBITDA — Enterprise value divided by earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization. Why it matters: A classic "what would a private buyer pay" multiple — used in M&A. Strips out tax and capital-structure noise. Reference: 8–12x for mature businesses · 15–25x for growth · Below 5x often signals distress Full explanation → |
13.7x / 35.7x / 43.1x |
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 7 same-industry peers; implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/Sales | EV/GP | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNAP | Snap Inc | Software & IT Services | $9.9B | 2.3x | — | — | 1.2% |
| BZ | Kanzhun Ltd | Software & IT Services | $12.6B | 10.6x | — | 35.7x | 4.0% |
| VNET | VNET Group, Inc. | Software & IT Services | $13.0B | — | 41.5x | 116.5x | — |
| PINS | PINTEREST, INC. | Software & IT Services | $13.8B | 3.3x | — | 43.1x | 2.7% |
| MTCH | Match Group, Inc. | Software & IT Services | $8.4B | 3.4x | — | 13.7x | 8.1% |
| SIFY | SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LTD | Software & IT Services | $7.3B | — | 41.7x | — | — |
| RGTIW | Rigetti Computing, Inc. | Software & IT Services | $4.6B | 565.2x | — | — | 0.1% |
| DOCN | DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. | Software & IT Services ·fallback | $16.3B | 19.5x | 32.6x | 111.9x | 1.4% |
Quality & solvency checks
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
We can't produce a trustworthy Altman Z here: retained earnings weren't separately reported in our data, so a core input would have to be fabricated. Rather than show a categorical "distress" verdict from an invented number, we mark it unavailable. The classic manufacturing-calibrated model also fits asset-light businesses like this one poorly. Judge financial health from the leverage, cash position, and the measurable Piotroski checks instead.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
▾ The checks — what passed, what didn't (and what we couldn't measure)
-
✓ Positive net incomeNet income $31.6M in FY2025.
-
✓ Positive operating cash flowOperating cash flow $40.0M (was -$3.6M the prior year).
-
✓ Cash flow backs up reported profitOperating cash flow $40.0M vs net income $31.6M.
-
✓ Return on assets improvingReturn on assets 29.4% vs -15.5% a year ago.
-
✓ Debt load (vs assets)The filing reports no interest-bearing debt in either year (total assets $107.2M).
-
✓ Short-term liquidity (current ratio)Current ratio 1.94x vs 1.62x a year ago.
-
✓ Share count (dilution)Share count declined 8.1% (1,026.7M → 943.6M year-over-year), so the no-dilution check passed. (One-year change; the multi-year buyback pace can differ.)
-
✓ Pricing power (gross margin)Gross margin 29.2% vs 27.4% a year ago.
-
✓ Sales per asset (asset turnover)Asset turnover 4.14x vs 3.90x a year ago.
Missing data is never counted as a pass or a fail — it's shown as n/a and excluded from the denominator. Each check compares the company against its own prior year.
What if you assume different inputs?
Here's where we land — and what happens if you change the assumptions. Drag the sliders to set your own Discount RateDiscount Rate — The annual return you demand for taking single-stock risk instead of buying a safe Treasury or index fund.
Why it matters: Higher discount rate = stricter valuation (a stock has to produce more cash to be worth holding). Lower = more generous.
Reference: 8–12% is standard · 9–10% matches S&P 500 historical return · Below 7% is illogical for single-stock risk
Full explanation → (the annual return you demand for single-stock risk) and terminal growth; the value updates live so you can see whether the stock looks cheaper or richer. The discount rate starts at 10.0%, the figure our model used for SOGP. Open Advanced to also change beta, growth and the rate path.
Note: no headline intrinsic value is published for this stock (the valuation is held for a data-quality reason — see the notes above). The calculator below is a what-if tool: the values it produces are your assumptions played out, not our estimate.
A full intrinsic value isn't shown for SOGP because the valuation is currently held for a data-quality reason (see the guardrail notes above). The reverse-DCF reading still works — it needs only the price and cash flow — but we won't publish a forward value until the underlying data passes our checks.
—
⚙ Advanced — tinker with every input (beta, growth, rate path, margin → full intrinsic value)
A standard discounted cash flowDCF — Discounted Cash Flow — sums up all future cash a business will produce, adjusted for the fact that future dollars are worth less than dollars today.
Why it matters: It is the most fundamentally honest valuation method when applicable — but only works for companies with predictable, positive cash flow.
Reference: Best for: mature, profitable businesses. Fails for: pre-profit growth, banks, REITs.
Full explanation → (DCF) valuation is not meaningful for Sound Group Inc. due to a data/units issue, likely a multi-class share-count mismatch, which suppresses per-share values. While the company shows positive net income and operating cash flow in its latest period, the model's extreme valuation flag suggests current financials are not fully capturing its potential. Investors are likely betting on continued revenue growth and the company's ability to scale its software and IT services. The number one quantifiable risk is the data reliability issue, which prevents a clear per-share valuation.
As of 3 months ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What's free cash flow / what do these mean?
Revenue per share — how much the business earns from customers, divided by the number of shares outstanding. Top of the income statement.
Earnings per share — profit left after operating costs, interest, and taxes, per share. Two versions appear on this page and are not interchangeable: GAAP diluted EPS uses the company's weighted-average diluted share count during the reporting period (this is the "earnings" in "price-to-earnings"); net income per current share divides annual net income by today's share count. They differ whenever the share count has changed.
Owner-earnings free cash flow per share — the cash the business produces for shareholders. Savng's owner-earnings FCF subtracts capital expenditures and stock-based compensation from operating cash flow (SBC is a real dilution cost even though it's non-cash). This is deliberately more conservative than "standard" FCF, which subtracts only capital expenditures — so our figure is lower than the headline FCF you'll see elsewhere. FCF funds dividends, buybacks, debt repayment, and acquisitions; a company can report positive earnings yet negative FCF.
Debt per share — total interest-bearing borrowings divided by shares. High debt-per-share next to thin FCF-per-share is a fragility signal.
What you actually need to decide
Every stock price is a disagreement. Here's the single thing that must go right for the bulls, the single thing that breaks the thesis, and the concrete signposts to watch so you can update your view as real results arrive.
- Continued revenue growth above 7.5% in upcoming quarters
- Maintenance of positive operating cash flow
- Resolution or clarification of the data/units issue affecting per-share metrics
The trend, in plain numbers (FY2024 → FY2025, latest reported)
Straight from the financial statements — no model, no opinion. For a small or unprofitable company, the direction of these numbers usually tells you more than any single valuation.
- Revenue grew +59% to $443.7M.
- Free cash flow turned positive at $38.9M.
- Gross margin improved to 29% (+2 pts).
- Swung to a profit of $31.6M (from a loss the prior year).
Nothing was clearly worsening year-over-year.
Management & Leadership
Sound Group Inc. is led by its CEO, Mr. Yushun Li. He has been instrumental in guiding the company's strategic direction in the software and IT services sector. The company's leadership focuses on expanding its service offerings and market reach.
What They Make
Sound Group Inc. provides software and IT services, primarily focusing on digital audio and entertainment platforms. Its offerings cater to users and content creators within the digital media ecosystem.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
What we use instead: earnings (P/E, EV/EBIT), book value (P/B) — computed from the figures this company does report, shown in the sections below. Those numbers are unaffected by the missing cash-flow data.
The market is likely pricing Sound Group Inc. based on its consistent revenue growth of 7.5% per year and its recent profitability, with positive net income and operating cash flow in the latest period. The market may be assigning value to the potential for further expansion in the digital audio and entertainment market, which is not fully captured by a backward-looking cash flow model, especially given the data reliability issues flagged by the model.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
The company funds its operations and growth through its positive operating cash flow and may rely on equity raises for significant expansion initiatives, as specific dividend or buyback rates are not available.
Growth / Revenue DCF
Extreme market premium (P/FCF 293x): market is pricing future growth far beyond current FCF. Using revenue/margin model.
Show advanced inputs
| Revenue Growth | 7.5% |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project product, services and recurring/cloud lines independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Moat Signals
Revenue has been growing at 7.5% per year over the last four years, from $333M to $444M.
Geography & Markets
Sound Group Inc. primarily operates in the global digital audio and entertainment market. Specific geographic revenue splits are not available from current data sources, but its services are generally accessible to an international user base.
Geographic Risks
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)40.2NeutralMomentum is balanced — neither overbought nor oversold.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (3 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (3)
- Revenue/margin projection model used - trailing FCF may understate growth runway at current scale.
- Extreme valuation (P/IV withheld — see the note above); output dominated by data/units issue (often a multi-class share-count mismatch). Suppressed.
- DATA UNAVAILABLE: per-share values suppressed due to missing/unreliable shares data.
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From Sound Group Inc.'s SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 443.7M | 31.6M | $0.03 |
| 2024 | 278.4M | -11.1M | $-0.01 |
| 2023 | 291.8M | -18.9M | $-0.02 |
| 2022 | 316.8M | 12.5M | $0.01 |
| 2021 | 332.6M | -20.0M | $-0.02 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
| Year | Operating CF | CapEx | − SBC & adj. | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 40.0M | 493,000 | 646,000 | 38.9M |
| 2024 | -3.6M | 1.5M | 1.9M | -7.1M |
| 2023 | -16.5M | 840,000 | 3.8M | -21.1M |
| 2022 | 19.8M | 1.7M | 4.2M | 13.8M |
| 2021 | -6.3M | 3.2M | 5.9M | -15.4M |
How we define FCF: operating cash flow − capital expenditure − stock-based compensation (owner-earnings basis — SBC is a real cost to shareholders even though it's non-cash). Latest year: 40.0M − 493,000 − 646,000 (SBC & adj.) = 38.9M. This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses, though the DCF's starting value is a projected from revenue × terminal margin, not this single year.
Balance Sheet
| Total Assets | 107.2M |
| Total Liabilities | 53.7M |
| Equity | 57.4M |
Similar companies worth a look
Same sector and industry, similar fundamentals shape. Verify everything yourself — this list is computed mechanically and does not reflect our judgment about whether any of these are a good investment.