Vityaz

OJSC "Vityaz"

UNP: 300031652 · 13a P. Brovka St., Vitebsk 210605

Export-orientedMonopoliesCity-formingRestructuring

Identification

UNP300031652
OKED26400 — manufacture of consumer electronics
Legal formOJSC
Governing body100% state (sole shareholder); governing body — general meeting, supervisory board, director
State share100%
Address13a P. Brovka St., Vitebsk 210605
Websitehttp://www.vityas.com/

Financial statements

k BYN

Line itemReporting yearPrior year
Fixed assets108 585104 471
Intangible assets1 6921 847
Income-bearing investments in tangible assets1 7281 548
Investments in long-term assets6 9187 808
Long-term financial investments4 9494 849
Long-term receivables
Total Section I (long-term assets)123 872120 523
Inventories84 86892 463
— materials35 47083 492
— work in progress1 0581 145
— finished goods and merchandise48 1047 596
— goods shipped231225
Deferred expenses14095
VAT on acquired goods, works, services
Short-term receivables21 48641 944
Short-term financial investments
Cash and cash equivalents8755 210
Other short-term assets2626
Total Section II (short-term assets)111 827140 503
BALANCE (assets)235 699261 026
Charter capital24 64324 643
Reserve capital3 6602 629
Additional capital96 218106 253
Retained earnings (uncovered loss)-7 022-8 668
Total Section III (equity)117 499124 857
Long-term loans and borrowings
Long-term lease liabilities
Deferred income17 725
Total Section IV (long-term liabilities)17 725
Short-term loans and borrowings22 52122 664
Current portion of long-term liabilities
Short-term payables77 045112 318
— to suppliers, contractors, providers51 90343 099
— on payroll1 1941 239
— on lease payments
Total Section V (short-term liabilities)100 475136 169
BALANCE (equity and liabilities)235 699261 026

Computed metrics

K1 · Current ratio
1.113
Prior: 1.032(+7.9%)
F1.290 / F1.690
K1 · Own working capital ratio
-0.057
Prior: 0.031(-284.8%)
(F1.490 - F1.190) / F1.290
K2 · Sales profitability
1.66%
Prior: 4.81%(-3.16 пп)
F2.060 / F2.010 × 100%
K2 · Net profitability
0.49%
Prior: 1.53%(-1.04 пп)
F2.210 / F2.010 × 100%
K3 · Revenue dynamics
-14%
(F2.010_2025 / F2.010_2024) - 1
K3 · Debt dynamics
-0.63%
(F1.510 + F1.610)_2025 / (F1.510 + F1.610)_2024 - 1
Operating cash-flow margin
-2.2%
Prior: -0.19%
(F4.020 + F4.030) / F2.010 × 100%

Integrity checks

Checks passed: 3 of 6

Balance sheet balances (assets = liabilities)
Cash-flow integrity
Cash-flow residuals
Cash position
Capital transition
Profit consistency

Failed checks indicate gaps or inconsistencies in the source filing itself (typically in form F4, the cash-flow statement), not data-entry errors. The balance sheet (assets = liabilities) reconciles for every enterprise.

Signals

Red flags
  • Finished-goods overstocking: F1.214 = 48,104 (vs 7,596 prior) = +6.7x; management (P11) acknowledges a stock-to-monthly-production ratio = 151.98% (vs 23.9%) — TVs not leaving the warehouse for ~5 months
  • K2 sales profitability collapsing: 4.81% → 1.66% (-3.16pp); K2 net: 1.53% → 0.49%; net profit -72.4%
  • K1 SOS provision = -0.057 (negative): current assets not covered by own sources; F1.490 − F1.190 = 117,499 − 123,872 = -6,373 — long-term assets funded by short-term payables
  • OCF margin negative: -2.20% (vs -0.19% prior); management in the Notes (P12) cites 'free cash flow -4,070k BYN' with an assessment of 'declining cash flow'
  • Management's own assessment (P12, Resolution No.16/46): medium bankruptcy-risk degree; liquidity — 'high risk'; quick liquidity — 'critical risk'; interest coverage 0.45 — 'critical risk'; debt/EBITDA 13.31 — 'critical risk'
  • Export dependence on the RF = 99.9% of all exports; Chinese price aggression in the RF market (Hisense/Xiaomi/TCL/Haier); overall TV-sales decline in the RF -12-15%
  • 10 planned targets for 2025 not met (management P11): profitability, exports, physical-volume index, net profit, cost reduction, investment, TV production volume, TV export volume, stock ratio
Yellow flags
  • Long-term-asset coverage on real capital (with long-term liabilities) = 0.285 — F1.490 is positive (117,499) but F1.450 fixed-asset revaluation = 96,218 (82% of capital). Real equity (F1.410+F1.460) = +17,621 — positive, but small. Coverage on standard capital 1.092 vs on real 0.285 — a large gap. Capital is nominal; liquidation is not realistic via asset sale (the revalued value may not match market value)
  • Dividends accrued 1,372 (to the state shareholder), but actually paid 0 (vs 1,465 paid prior). The payment deadline is tied to Art.72 of the Economic-Companies law — deferred until circumstances are resolved. May be either a timing-shift (declared not paid) or a sign of financial strain
  • K1 current ratio improving 1.032 → 1.113 (+7.9%), but still below the 1.25 requirement; management classifies it as 'high risk'
  • Cash F1.270 = 875 (vs 5,210 prior), a 6-fold drop — the liquidity buffer is nearly exhausted
  • Financial cycle grew 16.1 → 27.2 days; inventory turnover 78.3 → 101.5 days (management's own metric, P12)
  • Appearance of F1.540 'deferred income' (long-term) = 17,725 (a new line, prior 0). Nature unclear — possibly state targeted financing (a capital-channel candidate) or deferred revenue from long-term contracts. Requires clarification via the Notes (an indirect subsidy sign, not directly confirmed)
Green signals
  • Real equity (F1.410 + F1.460) = +17,621k BYN, positive in both years (cur 17,621, prior 15,975) — structurally NOT bankrupt, unlike deeply distressed enterprises in the sample (with real equity around -85,854)
  • Debt reduced: F1.630 short-term payables 112,318 → 77,045 (-31%); F1.610 short-term loans stable 22,664 → 22,521 (-0.6%). Overall debt falling
  • Positive capital transition: F3.200 = 117,499 vs opening 124,857, a decline via dividends (-1,372) + revaluation reduction (-5,774), but not via loss — the operating base is positive
  • Capital repair of fixed assets is active: F1.110 fixed assets +4k (+3.9%); F4.060 investment expenses (-202) — symbolic; the main inflow into fixed assets is via revaluation F2.220 = +8,215
  • Net profit positive 1,690k BYN — operationally viable; not a liquidation zone

Recommendation

Suggested outcome
Restructuring
Category
Distressed
Health score
0.77
Confidence level
Medium

Vityaz is the flagship of Belarusian production of color LCD televisions, household appliances, EV charging stations, and medical equipment, located in Vitebsk. 100% state-owned (the sole shareholder is the state), a significant employer (a city-forming candidate for Vitebsk). It produces ~1.1 million televisions a year and has a complex network of 6 subsidiaries (4 in RB, 2 in RF). Exports make up ~82.5% of revenue — this is the first primary_group: export_oriented in the pilot after a long series of district-level agribusiness and mid-scale city-forming enterprises.

Financial condition 2025 — operationally viable, but in a zone of strong pressure. Net profit is positive (BYN 1,690k), the balance sheet reconciles, real equity is positive (+17,621), debt is manageable. But margin compression is sharp: sales K2 4.81% → 1.66% (−3.16 pp), net K2 1.53% → 0.49% (−1.04 pp), net profit −72.4%. Revenue fell −14% (close to the 15% red-flag threshold). Finished-goods inventory grew 6.7× — a critical sign of overstocking, which management itself classifies via an "inventory-to-average-monthly-output ratio of 151.98% vs 23.9%" — the televisions are not selling.

The root cause, per management's own analysis (Notes P11): Chinese price aggression in the RF market (Hisense/Xiaomi/TCL/Haier supplying directly), a general TV-sales decline of −12–15%, and a shift in demand toward cheap small-diagonal TVs. 99.9% of exports go to Russia — maximum concentration, a concrete risk.

Outcome — restructuring (distressed tier, MEDIUM confidence). Operationally alive, but it needs:

1. Restructuring of the product mix (moving away from the segment where Hisense/Xiaomi dominate on price; shifting into charging stations, medical equipment, OEM production — where management already declares diversification)

2. A solution for the inventory overhang — either aggressive discounts or arrangements with subsidiary retail chains

3. Cost discipline — management is independently executing a cost-reduction plan (actual 2,774k vs plan 1,166 — overachievement)

4. Possibly — a state capital injection or subsidy via F1.540 (a new line of 17,725 — its nature requires clarification)

Privatization in the current form is problematic — the financial condition will not attract an investor, and Chinese competition persists; operational stabilization is needed first. Liquidation is ruled out — operationally alive, real equity positive, a regional employer. State investment is possible as a path, but without operational restructuring the money would go to covering the overstocking, not to development.

OSINT Belarus 2.0