Sharemaestro company report · Value with deterioration warnings · TOR

ACT Energy Technologies Ltd.

ACX · The discount needs evidence of repair

3 of 3 available weekly market readings are positive. Price conditions are supportive, but the factor profile still has a weak link.

The selected research question · Value with deterioration warnings

What is challenging the apparent value?

This screen requires a value reading alongside multiple deterioration warnings. Test whether growth, business strength and market conditions are stabilising or worsening.

The value case under challenge

The discount needs evidence of repair

The useful change would be stronger company readings alongside improving market conditions. Continued weakness would reinforce the concern, even if the value rank stays high.

Latest change: 0 improving, 1 weakening and 3 unchanged across the 4 comparable focus pillars since the previous edition.

2/4 strong
Focus pillars with standing ≥65. This is a breadth check, not a new combined score.
Value
92/100

+16.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 100% of 17 observed editions
Business strength
24/100

+1.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 0% of 17 observed editions
Growth
0/100

-7.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 0% of 17 observed editions
Price strength
83/100

+52.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 65% of 17 observed editions

The comparison uses companies qualifying for this screen in the same universe and edition. Medians require at least five companies. Historical strength counts actual factor observations; it does not claim historical screen membership.

01 · The company in perspective

The shape of the evidence

Higher means stronger relative standing.
Value92/100
+31.5 points vs Energy median
Business strength24/100
-20.0 points vs Energy median
Price strength83/100
+11.5 points vs Energy median
Growth0/100
-33.0 points vs Energy median
Capital return25/100
-41.0 points vs Energy median

Vertical marks show the peer median · 92 company records in the comparison.

Current research reading

Value needs scrutiny

The value ranking is attractive, but business strength is weaker.

Cheapness needs stronger operating evidence and market confirmation.

Strongest pillar

Value

92/100 standing

Weakest pillar

Growth

0/100 standing

The strongest and weakest pillars describe this profile, not changes in company performance. The history below shows whether the readings are improving.

Beneath the factor profile

How well does the business support the score?

Derived from the saved company inputs · 25 Sep 2026
Cash value43/100
Cash backing57/100
Business durability54/100
Financial resilience50/100
Capital discipline50/100
Price support60/100

These established Sharemaestro cash-research scores summarise cash backing, durability, resilience and capital discipline. Higher is stronger on the available tests. They are separate from universe ranks and are not percentiles or probabilities. Missing components remain unavailable.

02 · Market confirmation

Is the price supporting the case?

Full chart terminal ↗
Trend SignalPositivelatest completed chart observation
Market DynamicsPositivelatest completed chart observation
Relative StrengthPositivelatest completed chart observation
Price / Fair Value+30.2%positive is above the reference

03 · What is changing

A strong reading matters more when it lasts.

7 Jun 2026 – 25 Sep 2026
Factor standing, one edition at a time

Read across for persistence. Read down for breadth. Each cell is an actual published observation.

80–9965–7940–640–39No reading
Company factor history. Higher scores mean stronger standing in the comparison universe.
Factor7 Jun202614 Jun202621 Jun202628 Jun20265 Jul202612 Jul202619 Jul202626 Jul20262 Aug20269 Aug202616 Aug202623 Aug202630 Aug20264 Sep202611 Sep202618 Sep202625 Sep2026LatestChange
CombinedFocus880.0points
ValueFocus92-1.0points
Business strengthFocus240.0points
GrowthFocus00.0points
Price strengthFocus830.0points
Capital returnFurther context250.0points

Hover or focus a cell to inspect its dated reading. Arrow keys move between factors and editions. Scroll across for more dates.

Changes since the previous edition
Value-1.0 pts93 → 92
Business strength0.0 pts24 → 24
Price strength0.0 pts83 → 83
Growth0.0 pts0 → 0
Capital return0.0 pts25 → 25

Changes compare 18 Sep 2026 with 25 Sep 2026. The underlying company period did not change between these editions. Prices, peer rankings and other inputs can still move the scores. Changes in a relative score do not, by themselves, identify a cause.

04 · Competitive position

Company strength, in its peer context

Explore Energy ↗

Value and Business strength

ACX is highlighted against companies in the Value with deterioration warnings screen. Select a point to compare the same research angle. Up to 250 companies shown.

Has price kept pace?

Price returns to 25 Sep 2026. The comparison is the median of companies in the same sector with a reading, not a traded portfolio.

3 monthsACX+30.4%Sector median6.1%Difference+24.3 pp
6 monthsACX+6.9%Sector median-2.9%Difference+9.7 pp
12 monthsACX+55.9%Sector median32.6%Difference+23.4 pp

Relative standing is the useful comparison.

A rising share price can still trail its peers. A company with falling prices can still outperform a weaker sector. Compare the return gap with the factor profile before drawing a conclusion.

At least five sector observations are required to display a median. Returns exclude dividends. These are completed historical returns, not forward estimates.

05 · Staying power and price risk

Separate company standing from the ride.

Strong factor evidence does not remove price risk.
Value · strong editions100%score ≥65 in 17 observed editions
Annualised volatility35.3%stored one-year daily measure · factor date
Input coverage100%available factor inputs, not certainty

Drawdown measures the weekly close below its running high within the displayed price history. It starts at zero and is not an all-time drawdown. Persistence counts observed editions only; missing weeks are not filled in.

06 · Research playbook

What would strengthen — or weaken — this reading?

Conditions to monitor, not a trade instruction.
Build the Value with deterioration warnings case

Deterioration slows and market conditions stabilise

Watch for improving business strength and growth over more than one edition, then test for market confirmation.

3 of 3 available weekly market readings are positive. Price conditions are supportive, but the factor profile still has a weak link.

Challenge the case

Company weakness and negative price evidence reinforce each other

Growth is the weakest measured focus pillar at 0/100. Check whether it is recovering, stable or deteriorating in the history above.

A loss of screen qualification, lower coverage or deterioration across several readings would require a fresh review.

Compare the alternatives

Keep the research question consistent

Compare ACX with other companies selected by Value with deterioration warnings. A stronger overall score does not necessarily mean stronger evidence for this particular approach.

Open this screen →

Screen membership

Where ACX qualifies

The same selection rules used by the Company Screener.

A traceable Sharemaestro report

Built from the record we have.

This report uses published Sharemaestro factor snapshots and stored completed weekly prices and indicators. Company inputs are translated into comparable standing, change and context. The page does not fetch live accounts or infer missing company results.

Scores use the established higher-is-stronger Sharemaestro display convention and are relative to Canada - CAD. Sector medians compare those same universe scores; they do not re-rank the company. Peer medians exclude missing readings.

The company period is the period end used in the factor edition, not its filing date. Stored history is an observation record, not a claim of a point-in-time investable backtest. None of these scores is a probability or expected return.

Historical price series may reflect provider adjustments. The combined score is a summary, not a substitute for the distinct strengths, weaknesses and data coverage shown above.

Evidence context