Jindal Saw Q2 FY27 results: net profit down 74.5% to ₹35.28 crore, revenue up 5.6%

How did Jindal Saw perform in Q2 FY27?

Jindal Saw reported consolidated revenue of ₹4,472 crore for Q2 FY27, up ₹238.19 crore, or 5.6%, from Q2 FY26 and ₹19.48 crore, or 0.4%, from Q1 FY27. EBITDA was ₹260.98 crore, down ₹190.14 crore, or 42.1%, year on year and ₹135.72 crore, or 34.2%, from the previous quarter. The EBITDA margin fell to 5.8% from 10.7% and 8.9%, respectively.

Consolidated profit before tax was ₹17.84 crore, down ₹155.30 crore, or 89.7%, from Q2 FY26 and ₹130.40 crore, or 88.0%, from Q1 FY27. PAT was ₹35.28 crore, down ₹103.28 crore, or 74.5%, year on year and ₹55.51 crore, or 61.1%, sequentially. Basic EPS fell to ₹0.74 from ₹2.38 a year earlier and ₹1.63 in Q1 FY27. On a standalone basis, revenue was ₹3,823.8 crore and PAT was ₹70.69 crore.

What changed in Jindal Saw's costs and profit?

Total expenses increased ₹414.32 crore, or 10.1%, to ₹4,505 crore from Q2 FY26, outpacing the increase in revenue. Cost of materials fell ₹66.20 crore, or 2.7%, to ₹2,397 crore, while employee cost rose ₹22.55 crore, or 5.4%, to ₹438.93 crore. Finance costs declined ₹27.46 crore, or 18.0%, to ₹125.45 crore, depreciation increased ₹13.45 crore, or 8.6%, to ₹168.96 crore and other expenses declined ₹69.38 crore, or 6.9%, to ₹936.19 crore.

Other income increased ₹20.83 crore, or 68.4%, to ₹51.27 crore, and there was no exceptional item. Tax moved from ₹44.01 crore to ₹20.86 crore of tax credit. The company’s filing said the current tax expense was net of tax adjustments of ₹266.7 million towards additional claims for earlier years adjudicated in its favour by the appellate authority.

Management said the MENA disruption affected capacity utilisation and revenue recognition, while lower DI realisation and gross profit per kilogram, which fell from INR51 to INR41, contributed to lower profitability. Management also identified a coking coal price surge, domestic water infrastructure softness, pellet margin pressure, and logistics and freight cost inflation as risks.

How did the first half of FY27 go?

For the first half of FY27, consolidated revenue rose ₹605.82 crore, or 7.3%, to ₹8,924.1 crore from H1 FY26, while total income increased ₹632.05 crore, or 7.6%, to ₹8,999.04 crore. PBT fell ₹370.97 crore, or 69.1%, to ₹166.08 crore, and PAT declined ₹427.96 crore, or 77.2%, to ₹126.07 crore.

Basic EPS for H1 FY27 was ₹2.37, down ₹6.67, or 73.8%, from ₹9.04 in H1 FY26. The company’s filing noted that the H1 FY27 current tax expense was net of ₹266.7 million of adjustments relating to additional claims for earlier years adjudicated in its favour by the appellate authority.

What do the balance sheet and cash flow show?

At 30 September 2026, total assets were ₹20,839.53 crore, down from ₹21,686.2 crore at 31 March 2026. Total equity was ₹12,295.12 crore, compared with ₹12,282.71 crore, while borrowings fell to ₹4,173.76 crore from ₹4,690.74 crore and cash declined to ₹387.16 crore from ₹406.72 crore.

Inventories were ₹4,539.77 crore at 30 September 2026, compared with ₹5,267.29 crore at 31 March 2026. Trade receivables fell to ₹2,885.71 crore from ₹3,093.55 crore, while trade payables declined to ₹2,391.19 crore from ₹2,623.12 crore. In H1 FY27, operating cash flow was ₹1,385.29 crore against negative ₹308.66 crore in H1 FY26; investing cash flow was negative ₹500.37 crore and financing cash flow negative ₹905.9 crore.

How has Jindal Saw done over the last 8 quarters?

Revenue over the last eight quarters peaked at ₹5,271.3 crore in Q3 FY25 and was lowest at ₹4,084.68 crore in Q1 FY26. It then moved to ₹4,233.6 crore in Q2 FY26, ₹4,943.41 crore in Q3 FY26, ₹4,633.48 crore in Q4 FY26, ₹4,452.31 crore in Q1 FY27 and ₹4,471.79 crore in Q2 FY27. Revenue has risen year on year in each of the last two quarters.

PAT peaked at ₹479.38 crore in Q3 FY25 and bottomed at ₹35.28 crore in Q2 FY27, the latest period in the series. EBITDA margin also reached its lowest point in the series at 5.8% in Q2 FY27, against 17.8% at its peak in Q3 FY25. The latest quarter showed revenue edging higher sequentially, but PAT and margin declined further.

What else did the company announce?

The board approved the unaudited standalone and consolidated financial results for the quarter and half year ended 30 September 2026 on 16 October 2026. The same-day investor communication set out financial and operational highlights and did not announce a dividend, fund raise or appointment in the excerpts provided.

The investor presentation reported an order book of approximately US$1,135 million for iron and steel pipes and pellets, with additional LOIs of approximately USD575 million. It said execution of export orders to the Middle East was on hold because of the Middle East conflict, while the balance order book was projected to span the next 9–12 months.

What did the auditors point out?

Price Waterhouse Chartered Accountants LLP said its conclusion on the standalone financial statements was not modified. It drew attention to the appeal filed by Jindal ITF Limited before the divisional bench of the Delhi High Court, management’s assessment of the expected outcome, recovery of claims and the consequent impact on JITF’s going concern. The auditor stated that its conclusion on the statement was not modified in respect of this matter.

The auditor also noted that the review was conducted under Standard on Review Engagements 2410 and provided less assurance than an audit. It said nothing had come to its attention indicating that the statement had not been prepared in all material respects under the applicable accounting standards and listing regulations or that it contained a material misstatement.

What did Jindal Saw's management say?

Management said H2 FY27 was expected to be better than H1 FY27 on volumes and margins, with margins moving towards double-digit from Q3 FY27 as the oil and gas mix improved. It maintained its FY27 target for pipe-segment volumes to be higher than FY26 but gave no specific EBITDA margin number. Management also expected further inventory and receivables reduction from Q3 FY27 onwards to improve liquidity and reduce bank borrowings.

Management said the Abu Dhabi seamless plant and Saudi SAW JV were targeted for commercial operations in FY28-29, with financial closure expected in the coming months. It said the Abu Dhabi DI plant was operating at approximately 50% utilisation because of regional conflict, while a 6 lakh tonne Saudi job-work order remained stalled and alternative logistics were being worked on.

Management identified geopolitical tension in West Asia, shipping delays for Saudi orders, higher coking coal prices, soft domestic water infrastructure demand, execution delays in EPC work, pellet margin pressure and freight cost inflation as risks. It also said Saudi Arabia had imposed anti-dumping duty of 16–30% on Indian DI exporters, which could redirect demand towards the Abu Dhabi facility because Jindal Saw did not export pipes from India to Saudi Arabia.

How did Jindal Saw shares react?

The filing was released after market hours. From the price when the filing appeared, the stock rose 1.5% after 5 minutes, 1.4% after 15 minutes and 2.9% after 30 minutes. On the reaction day, it closed 1.8% below the previous close; by the next day's close, it was down 10.3% from the pre-results close, and by the fifth session it was down 18.4%.

The Iron & Steel Products industry median fell 1.5% on the reaction day, 3.4% by the next day's close and 5.4% by the fifth session. Jindal Saw's move was therefore 0.2 percentage points below the sector median on the reaction day, 6.9 percentage points below it by the next day's close and 13.0 percentage points below it by the fifth session. Earlier reaction-day moves were negative on 14 July 2026, 27 April 2026, 17 October 2025, 5 August 2025, 2 May 2025, 24 January 2025 and 18 October 2024.

How did other Iron & Steel Products companies do?

Among 28 other Iron & Steel Products companies that filed for the quarter, the median revenue growth was 25.5%. Jindal Saw's revenue growth was lower than 24 peers, while 4 peers grew more slowly. The peer group was also compared with 33 companies for profit growth, of which 23 reported higher profit.