— Est. Bengaluru · India Case Studies
Selected confidential engagements across industrial manufacturing, consumer wellness, growth-stage D2C, enterprise receivables, and institutional hospitality. Client identities are protected; all metrics reflect actual analytical findings from live engagements.
— Case Study 01
Industrial Manufacturing & Engineering · Confidential Client
A ₹450+ Cr multi-unit industrial enterprise — electrical equipment, transformers, motors, engineering systems — had stable topline but no line-of-sight into unit profitability, working capital stress, or product mix distortion. Lenders were tightening. Management was operating blind.
Revenue Scale
₹450+ Cr
Multi-unit operations
Manufacturing Units
9
2,000+ employees
EBITDA vs Peers
8% vs 14%
Significant underperformance
Current Ratio
0.40×
Critically below covenant
— Diagnostic findings
— Scope of engagement
— Key analytical findings
| Metric | Observed | Listed Peer Benchmark |
|---|---|---|
| EBITDA Margin | ~8% | ~14% (peer avg.) |
| Contribution Margin | 20% (actual) | 24% (budgeted) |
| Current Ratio | 0.40× | Industry min. ~1.1× |
| Receivables Overdue 60d+ | ~28% of book | Flagged for reclassification |
| Supplier Payable Cycle | >170 days | Structural dependency risk |
| Potential Bad Debt Exposure | ₹4.7+ Cr | Provisioning framework built |
| Net Margin | ~3% | Profitability levers identified |
— Engagement deliverables
"Management finally had visibility into where profitability was leaking — across units, product groups, and the receivables book. The audit changed the conversation with lenders entirely."
— Selected Engagement, Industrial Manufacturing Enterprise— Case Study 02
Consumer Wellness & Healthcare Services · Metropolitan Platform
A ₹100+ Cr multi-location wellness platform — 30+ centers across metro cities — was in advanced institutional investment discussions. Investors needed earnings quality analysis, center-level economics, and normalized EBITDA. The financial reporting wasn't built for institutional scrutiny.
Revenue Scale
₹100+ Cr
Rapidly expanding
Locations
30+
Pan-metro operations
EBITDA Quality
Distorted
Non-recurring costs embedded
Engagement Type
DD Support
Institutional investment
— Analytical challenges
— Diligence support provided
— Diligence analytical framework
| Analysis Area | Finding | Output |
|---|---|---|
| EBITDA Normalisation | Overstated by expansion costs | Adjusted EBITDA framework built |
| Mature Center Margins | Blended with ramp-up units | Materially stronger operating leverage revealed |
| New Location Utilisation | Below optimal threshold | Ramp timeline modelled |
| Revenue Quality | Undocumented | Recurring behaviour confirmed, quantified |
| Data Room Readiness | Unstructured | Investor-grade schedules produced |
| Unit Economics | Not available | Per-center P&L and KPI framework |
— Engagement deliverables
"The distinction between mature and ramp-up center economics — once clearly presented — materially changed the investment conversation. Investor confidence in the scalability thesis was substantially strengthened."
— Selected Engagement, Consumer Wellness Platform— Case Study 03
Fashion & Consumer Retail · High-Growth D2C Brand
A high-growth digital-first apparel brand with ₹40+ Cr revenue was preparing for institutional fundraising. Strong topline across online channels — but no structured view of contribution margins, customer acquisition economics, or inventory efficiency. Investors wanted answers the team couldn't provide.
Revenue Scale
₹40+ Cr
D2C digital-first brand
Growth Profile
High
Online channels dominant
Margin Visibility
None
No SKU-level view
Fundraise Stage
Institutional
Pre-raise analytics gap
— Problems identified
— Analytics delivered
— Analytical outputs
| Area | Pre-Engagement | Post-Engagement |
|---|---|---|
| Contribution Margin (by channel) | Blended — unknown | Channel-wise split revealed |
| Best-performing channel | Unidentified | Significantly stronger economics confirmed |
| Inventory Risk | Not surfaced | Concentration risk identified, SKU-mapped |
| CAC monitoring | Not in place | Framework built, trend analysis enabled |
| EBITDA Scenario (Base FY27) | No model | ₹25.7 Cr modelled |
| Investor schedules | Not available | Full DD-ready pack produced |
— Engagement deliverables
"The channel-wise contribution breakdown was the first time management saw that their fastest-growing channel was also their least profitable. That insight alone reshaped the scaling strategy before investor conversations began."
— Selected Engagement, D2C Apparel Brand— Case Study 04
Engineering & Industrial Services · Enterprise Receivables Advisory
A large engineering enterprise with ₹100+ Cr in receivables across multiple project segments had no real-time collection visibility, no ERP-integrated tracking, and no structured escalation mechanism. Collections were manual, fragmented, and flying blind.
Receivables Reviewed
₹100+ Cr
Multi-project enterprise
Tracking System
Manual
No ERP integration
Escalation Structure
None
Ad hoc and informal
Dispute Tracking
Absent
No structured framework
— Governance gaps identified
— Transformation scope
— Transformation framework
| Process Area | Current State | Future State (Designed) |
|---|---|---|
| Ageing Tracking | Manual, fragmented | ERP-linked, real-time |
| Collection Visibility | None / lagged | Dashboard with daily refresh |
| Escalation Matrix | Ad hoc | Structured, owner-mapped |
| Dispute Management | No framework | Categorisation + tracking system |
| Milestone-level Monitoring | Non-existent | Project-wise visibility built |
| MIS Reporting | Ad hoc spreadsheets | KPI dashboard framework |
| Working Capital Monitoring | Not measured | Integrated WC model |
— Engagement deliverables
"For an enterprise managing ₹100+ Cr in receivables with no structured tracking, the engagement delivered something foundational — a governance architecture that reduced operational dependency on institutional memory and fragmented spreadsheets."
— Selected Engagement, Engineering Enterprise— Case Study 05
Sports & Institutional Hospitality · F&B Cost Benchmarking
A large sports residential academy engaged an external food services vendor for athlete meal operations. Management had concerns: were the pricing, margins, and procurement structures reasonable? An independent analytical review was commissioned to answer that question with precision.
Revenue Analysed
₹55+ L
F&B vendor operations
Gross Margin (found)
~59%
Average across meal types
Net Profit Margin
~12.7%
Post overhead allocation
Raw Material Volatility
>50% MoM
Certain categories
— Procurement and pricing concerns
— Analytical scope
— Benchmarking findings
| Metric | Finding | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Average Gross Margin | ~59% | Benchmarked vs. comparable F&B operations |
| Net Profit Margin | ~12.7% | Post overhead — within reasonable range |
| Raw Material Volatility | >50% MoM (select items) | Pricing adjustment mechanism recommended |
| Procurement Transparency | Weak documentation | Controls framework designed |
| Meal-wise Cost Build-up | Not available | Recipe-level costing produced |
| Future Pricing Framework | Absent | Structured revision mechanism built |
| Overhead Allocation | Undocumented | Validated and documented |
— Engagement deliverables
"An independent benchmarking exercise gave the institution what a vendor conversation never could — a clear, analytical view of whether meal pricing was reasonable and where pricing governance needed strengthening."
— Selected Engagement, Sports Residential Academy— Next step
Book a free 30-minute diagnostic. We'll identify the 3 biggest finance visibility gaps in your business — no strings attached.