Annolyse
BriefingsCompaniesInsightsPrinciplesCompareChatWatchlist

Explore

  • Briefings
  • Companies
  • Insights
  • Compare

Resources

  • Search
  • Methodology

© 2026 Annolyse.

ChartsAnalysisChatData
  1. Charts
  2. Analysis
  3. Chat
  4. Data
  5. Sources
←Back to briefings
EBOS Group (EBO) / HY25

NPAT fell 18.9% on a 9.0% revenue decline as dividend held flat

Operating deleverage pushed the NPAT payout ratio to 100.2% while net debt to EBITDA crept up to 3.86x even as cash conversion rebounded.

Healthcare / Healthcare distribution

EBO revenue trajectory

Revenue context before the current result.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was $6.8b, versus $12.3b in FY25.

EBO EBITDA margin

EBITDA margin across covered periods.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was 4.5%, versus 4.5% in FY25.

EBO operating cash flow

Operating cash flow across covered periods.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was $46.6m, versus $418.5m in FY25.

EBO working-capital movement

Operating working-capital absorption or release by reporting period.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was $348m, versus $97.4m in FY25.
Release date
19 February 2025
Published
22 April 2026
Ask about this result
Sections⌄
  1. Charts
  2. Analysis
  3. Chat
  4. Data
  5. Sources

Key metrics

Numbers worth scanning first

HY25 vs HY24

Revenue

$6b

-9.0% ↓ vs $6.6b

EBITDA

$275.8m

-9.0% ↓ vs $303.1m

Net profit after tax

$110.5m

-18.9% ↓ vs $136.2m

Net cash inflow from operating activities

$189.8m

+80.0% ↑ vs $105.5m

Interim dividend per share

57.0c

flat vs 57.0c

Operating profit

$207.3m

-12.4% ↓ vs $236.7m

Profit before tax

$155.8m

-18.9% ↓ vs $192m

Cash and cash equivalents

$237.9m

-34.9% ↓ vs $365.3m

What changed

Revenue fell 9.0% to $5,991.4m and EBITDA fell to $275.8m, but the operating leverage worked against EBOS through the rest of the income statement: PBT dropped 18.9% to $155.8m and NPAT dropped 18.9% to $110.5m

The effective tax rate was essentially unchanged at 28.3% versus 28.5%, so the NPAT decline reflects operating deleverage rather than a tax distortion.

Cash flow moved the other way. Operating cash inflow rose 80.0% to $189.8m and reported free cash flow lifted to $126.0m from $41.2m, lifting cash conversion (OCF/EBITDA) to 68.8% from 34.8%. Trade debtors fell 6.8% and inventories fell 6.6%, releasing working capital alongside the revenue contraction.

The interim dividend was held at NZ 57.0 cents per share. Gross borrowings fell to $1.3b, but cash also dropped to $237.9m, leaving net debt broadly flat at $1.1b and net debt to EBITDA edging up to 3.86x from 3.59x.

What matters

Operating deleverage is real

  • A 9.0% revenue decline produced a 9.0% EBITDA decline and an 18.9% NPAT decline, so each dollar of lost revenue cost more than proportionally as fixed cost absorption fell. This matters because it shows the cost base did not flex with the top line within the half, and the prior year's release flagged the underlying business excluding the now-departed contract — the read on that underlying remains harder to verify from the disclosure here.
  • The dividend now exceeds reported NPAT. Holding the interim at 57.0 cents lifted the payout ratio versus NPAT to 100.2% from 80.3%. It is still covered by reported free cash flow at an 87.8% payout ratio, but only because working capital released cash this half. Sustaining the distribution relies on either earnings recovery in 2H or further balance-sheet support.
  • Leverage drifted the wrong way despite lower borrowings. Net debt to EBITDA rose to 3.86x from 3.59x because the EBITDA denominator shrank faster than gross debt. That is a passive deterioration rather than an active releveraging, but it narrows the cushion against any further earnings softness.

Within the mix, Animal Care revenue rose to $304.0m with segment result up to $59.0m, while Healthcare revenue fell to $5.7b with segment result down to $250.0m. Healthcare still drives 94.9% of revenue, so segment-level diversification did not offset the headline.

Expectations

No forward guidance, stated FY25 target, or backlog metric is supplied in the release excerpts, so any 2H trajectory has to be inferred from shape rather than confirmed

On the FY24 pattern (HY24 contributed 49.9% of full-year revenue, 50.0% of EBITDA, 50.1% of NPAT), the business was not historically second-half weighted, which means a 2H rebound would need a step-change rather than a normal seasonal lift.

Annualising the current half implies revenue around $12b versus FY24's $13.2b. Closing that gap in 2H requires the underlying ex-contract growth referenced in management's prior commentary to actually deliver in the second half; the release here does not quantify that path.

Quality of result

Reported earnings quality is mixed

The 18.9% NPAT decline is a clean operating signal because the tax rate is steady and there is no disclosed discontinued operation or one-off in the calculation pass. So the headline understates rather than overstates underlying weakness — there is no obvious below-the-line distortion to add back.

Cash quality is more flattering than it looks. The 80.0% jump in operating cash flow is largely a working-capital release: trade debtors fell $103.4m and inventories fell $87.8m, consistent with a smaller revenue base requiring less working capital rather than improved underlying conversion. That cash supports the held dividend and the modest debt reduction this half, but it is not a repeatable lever — once the working-capital base resets to the lower revenue run-rate, future cash flow will track earnings more closely.

Unresolved

Open questions

What is the underlying revenue and EBITDA growth rate excluding the contract that rolled off, and how does it compare with the prior-year ex-contract framing?
Why did segment result fall to $250.0m in Healthcare while Animal Care result rose to $59.0m, and what cost actions are in train to restore Healthcare margin?
How does management view a 100.2% NPAT payout ratio and 3.86x net debt to EBITDA in setting the final dividend?
Will the working-capital release reverse in 2H as the business stabilises at the new revenue base?
What is the expected trajectory of net debt to EBITDA over the next 12 months given the leverage drift this half?

This briefing cannot assess the underlying ex-contract growth rate, segment-level cost actions, or any FY25 guidance because none is quantified in the supplied release excerpts.

Chat

Ask about EBO HY25

Ask follow-up questions about EBOS Group's HY25 result.

Informational only. No buy, sell, hold, price-target, or personal financial advice.

Ask about EBO HY25

Informational only. No buy, sell, hold, price-target, or personal financial advice.

Sign in to chat

Sign in to ask questions about EBOS Group's HY25 result.

What is the underlying revenue and EBITDA growth rate excluding the contract that rolled off, and how does it compare with the prior-year ex-contract framing?Why does "Operating deleverage is real" matter?How strong was the cash and earnings quality in HY25?What should I watch next for EBO after HY25?

Checking account...

Data appendix

Show segment detail

Open to load segment breakdown.

Show analytical metrics

Open to load analytical metrics.

Show key metrics table

Open to load key metrics.

Sources

Current period

Interim Report

HY25 / financial report↗

Investor Presentation

HY25 / results presentation↗

NZX Results Announcement

HY25 / results announcement↗

NZX Results Announcement

HY25 / results release↗

Prior comparable period

Interim Report

HY24 / financial report↗

Media Release

HY24 / media release↗

NZX Results Announcement

HY24 / results announcement↗

Full-year context

Annual Report

FY24 / financial report↗

Media Release

FY24 / media release↗

NZX Results Announcement

FY24 / results announcement↗

Release context

Annual Meeting Presentations

HY25 / commentary↗

Related insights

Cross-company views selected from the metrics in this briefing.

Leverage and balance-sheet risk

Net debt / EBITDA is 3.86x, +0.27x versus the prior comparable period.

→

Cash conversion quality

This result converted 68.8% of EBITDA to operating cash flow, +34.0pp versus the prior comparable period.

→

Dividend coverage and payout pressure

Dividend payout versus pre-lease FCF is 55.9%, with NPAT payout at 100.2%.

→

Earnings quality and statutory distortions

PBT and NPAT growth diverged by 0.0pp.

→
This briefing is based on available company filings and standard Annolyse calculations. It is general information only and does not constitute financial advice. The analysis may contain errors. Always read the original company filings and consult a licensed financial adviser before making investment decisions.

Get notified when EBO publishes next

Get the next EBOS Group briefing and related NZX reporting-season updates by email.