This was lower than the Street’s estimates of Rs 3,771 crore and was up from Rs 2,947 crore in the year-ago period.
The company achieved consolidated revenues of Rs 64,668 crore in Q3FY25 registering a YoY growth of 17% on the back of a strong order book and a ramp-up in execution momentum across its Projects & Manufacturing (P&M) businesses.
The revenue was nearly in line with the Street’s estimates of Rs 64,742 crore.
Additionally, the company received its highest-ever quarterly orders of Rs 116,036 crore at the group level during the quarter ended December 31, 2024, registering a substantial YoY growth of 53%.
Also read: Q3 results today: Vedanta, Nestle among 134 companies to announce earnings on FridayAfter the company’s Q3 results, here is what analysts said:Nuvama: Buy| Target price: Rs 4,000
Nuvama maintained a “Buy” rating on L&T with a target price of Rs 4,000.
Nuvama cited buoyant order inflows and stable core operating profit margins (OPMs) during Q3, leading to a positive outlook. L&T has a strong order book of Rs 5.6 lakh crore, with 42% from international markets, and execution is rising, though margin improvement may take time. The core OPM is expected to bottom out at approximately 8.2%, with projections for FY26E/27E moving towards 8.5–9%. Additionally, management commentary indicates the possibility of large-ticket order inflows in Q4FY25.
Nomura: Buy| Target price: Rs 3,820
Nomura has maintained a “Buy” rating on L&T but revised the target price to Rs 3,820 from Rs 4,100.
Nomura noted that order inflows have exceeded estimates. However, Q3 EBITDA came in below expectations due to underperformance in the Infrastructure, Energy, and IT services segments. The firm anticipates a slower-than-expected recovery in core margins, projecting a 125 basis point expansion over FY24-27 compared to the earlier expectation of 200 basis points. Consequently, Nomura has reduced its EBITDA estimates by 3-6% for FY25-27.
L&T stock closed 0.85% lower at Rs 3,419.80 on the BSE on Thursday.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)
