Equal · Financial Report

Siloam International Hospitals

SILO/FY2021–FY2025/Educational Analysis/IDR/Data source · 2026-06-20

ROE = tax × interest × margin × turnover × leverage

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Tax burden	0.64x	0.70x	0.71x	0.58x	0.70x
Interest burden	0.97x	0.96x	0.97x	0.96x	0.93x
Operating margindriver	11.7%	10.9%	15.7%	13.3%	13.3%
Asset turnover	1.01x	0.98x	1.02x	0.86x	0.89x
Leverage (equity mult.)	1.43x	1.37x	1.36x	1.62x	1.46x
= Return on Equity (consolidated)	10.3%	9.9%	15.1%	10.3%	11.2%
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)	10.7%	10.3%	15.5%	10.0%	11.5%

Consolidated (pre-minority-interest) basis; the headline ROE in the ratio grid is owners’ basis.

Liquidity

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Current Ratio(Current Assets / Current Liabilities)	1.58x	1.23x	1.20x	0.85x	0.79x
Quick Ratio((Current Assets − Inventory) / Current Liabilities)	1.45x	1.14x	1.12x	0.81x	0.73x
Cash Ratio(Cash / Current Liabilities)	0.86x	0.49x	0.46x	0.41x	0.27x
Working Capital(Current Assets − Current Liabilities)	Rp 1.3 T	Rp 509 M	Rp 498 M	-Rp 768 M	-Rp 909 M

Leverage & Solvency

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Debt to Equity (DER)(Total Debt / Total Equity)	0.09x	0.07x	0.08x	0.31x	0.16x
Liabilities to Equity(Total Liabilities / Total Equity)	0.43x	0.37x	0.36x	0.62x	0.46x
Debt to Assets(Total Debt / Total Assets)	0.06x	0.05x	0.06x	0.19x	0.11x
Net Debt(Total Debt − Cash)	-Rp 1.3 T	-Rp 554 M	-Rp 539 M	Rp 617 M	Rp 477 M
Interest Coverage(EBIT / Interest Expense)	28.89x	27.11x	33.98x	28.28x	13.96x
Equity Multiplier (Assets ÷ Equity)	1.43x	1.37x	1.36x	1.62x	1.46x

Profitability

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Gross Margin(Gross Profit / Revenue)	36.4%	35.1%	38.0%	38.1%	36.8%
Operating Margin(EBIT / Revenue)	11.7%	10.9%	15.7%	13.3%	13.3%
Net Margin(Net Income / Revenue)	7.2%	7.3%	10.8%	7.4%	8.7%
EBITDA(EBIT + D&A)	Rp 1.6 T	Rp 1.5 T	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 2.1 T	Rp 2.2 T
EBITDA Margin(EBITDA / Revenue)	17.1%	16.2%	20.0%	17.1%	17.2%
Return on Assets (ROA)(Net Income / Total Assets)	7.2%	7.2%	11.0%	6.4%	7.7%
Return on Equity (ROE)(Net Income (Owners) / Equity (Owners))	10.5%	10.0%	15.3%	10.5%	11.5%
Tax Burden (Net ÷ Pretax)	0.64x	0.70x	0.71x	0.58x	0.70x
Interest Burden (Pretax ÷ EBIT)	0.97x	0.96x	0.97x	0.96x	0.93x
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)	10.7%	10.3%	15.5%	10.0%	11.5%

Operations & Efficiency

Turnover	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Asset Turnover(Revenue / Total Assets)	1.01x	0.98x	1.02x	0.86x	0.89x
Inventory Turnover(COGS / Inventory)	19.75x	30.59x	34.10x	37.36x	34.66x
Receivables Turnover(Revenue / Receivables)	8.09x	8.04x	7.72x	6.76x	7.51x
Payables Turnover(COGS / Payables)	28.66x	35.50x	31.30x	19.93x	19.15x

Conversion Period	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Days Inventory Outstanding (DIO)(365 × Inventory / COGS)	18.5 days	11.9 days	10.7 days	9.8 days	10.5 days
Days Sales Outstanding (DSO)(365 × Receivables / Revenue)	45.1 days	45.4 days	47.3 days	54.0 days	48.6 days
Days Payable Outstanding (DPO)(365 × Payables / COGS)	12.7 days	10.3 days	11.7 days	18.3 days	19.1 days
Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC)(DIO + DSO − DPO)	50.8 days	47.1 days	46.3 days	45.4 days	40.0 days

Cash Flow

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Free Cash Flow(Operating Cash Flow − Capex)	Rp 1.4 T	Rp 505 M	Rp 671 M	Rp 693 M	Rp 669 M

Valuation

price as-of 2026-07-31fundamentals: FY2025

Price Rp 2,199 · market cap Rp 29 T

Multiple	SILO	Peer median	vs median
P/E	25.68x	25.68x	0%
P/B	2.95x	2.95x	0%
P/S	2.22x	2.22x	0%
EV/EBITDA	13.27x	11.27x	+18%
EV/EBIT	17.09x	16.82x	+2%
EV/Sales	2.28x	2.28x	-0%
FCF Yield	2.34%	2.34%	0%
Dividend Yield	—	1.87%(2/3)	—

Only 3 peers are covered here, so the median is itself one of the members. A 0% gap can simply mean SILO sits at the median.

EV = mkt cap Rp 29 T + debt Rp 1.6 T − cash Rp 1.2 T + minority interest Rp 233 M = Rp 29 T

What the price implies

At today’s price, the market is paying for 26.5%/yr FCF growth (22.6% at 12.0% to 30.1% at 16.0% discount rates). Delivered over the last 4 years: -17.0% FCF · 8.2% revenue.

Reverse DCF: single-stage FCF, terminal growth 2.5%, discount band 12.0–16.0% (β=1; build cited in Methodology). Not a forecast.

Forward DCF (glass-box)

This model projects the operating cash the whole business generates, discounts it back at the blended cost of capital, and subtracts net debt. What remains is the equity value, stated per share. Every input below comes from the company's own audited record or from cited market data, and you can adjust each one yourself.

Assumption	Value	Basis
Rf (risk-free)	7.26%	Indonesia 10Y government bond, re-verified 31 Jul 2026
ERP (Rm − Rf)	6.69%	Damodaran Indonesia, Jul 2026 (Baa2, CRP 2.46%)
β	0.55 → 0.57	Hospitals/Healthcare Facilities (unlevered) relevered at own D/E 0.06
Cost of equity	11.09%	Rf + β × ERP
Cost of debt	7.66%	median interest coverage 28.3x (EBIT ÷ interest, FY2021–FY2025) implies a Aaa/AAA synthetic rating and a 0.40% default spread, over a 7.26% base (Indonesia 10Y 7.26%, already the sovereign rate). Its BOOK rate is 7.5%, which is what past debt actually costs; the gap is legacy or subsidised borrowing, not the rate on new debt. Spread table: A. Damodaran, Ratings, Interest Coverage Ratios and Default Spread, January 2026 data update (large non-financial service firms)
Tax rate	30.4%	median effective rate, FY2021–FY2025 (pretax ≈ EBIT − interest)
WACC	10.77%	95% E × CoE + 5% D × Kd × (1 − t)
Revenue growth (yr 1, fading)	8.2%	delivered 4-yr revenue CAGR 8.2%, fading linearly to terminal
EBIT margin	14.1%	mean EBIT margin, last 3 FYs
D&A / revenue	3.9%	mean D&A/revenue, last 3 FYs
Capex / revenue	13.4%	mean capex/revenue, last 3 FYs, for the explicit years. The terminal year instead FUNDS ITS OWN GROWTH: in stable growth g = reinvestment rate x return on capital, and returns are assumed to converge to the 10.8% cost of capital, so the perpetuity reinvests 23.2% of NOPAT and terminal capex is 6.3% of revenue against depreciation of 3.9%. Both simpler rules are wrong in opposite directions: holding the historical ratio charges a build phase in perpetuity, while setting capex equal to depreciation hands the company 2.5% growth forever for no new capital. Because returns converge to the cost of capital, terminal growth here is value-neutral
ΔNWC / Δrevenue	-1.9%	median ΔNWC/Δrevenue across the seeded years (NWC = AR + inventory − AP)
Terminal growth	2.5%	BI inflation-target midpoint (2.5% ± 1%)

Growth path

year 1 → fading to terminal over 5 yrs8.2%

EBIT margin14.1%

WACC10.8%

Terminal growth2.5%

Explicit years5

FCFF drivers

FCFF = NOPAT + D&A − capex − ΔNWC

Each default is the company's own historical average, which describes the phase it happened to be in. Switch a driver to Per-year when that phase is ending: a company mid-build does not spend at its peak rate forever, and one in a capex pause does not stay there. The terminal year keeps its own ratios, so a taper you enter here changes the explicit window and leaves the perpetuity coherent.

Capex

% of revenue13.4%

D&A

% of revenue3.9%

ΔNWC

% of the CHANGE in revenue-1.9%

Year	+1	+2	+3	+4	+5	T∞
Growth	8.2%	6.8%	5.3%	3.9%	2.5%	2.5%
Revenue	Rp 14 T	Rp 15 T	Rp 16 T	Rp 16 T	Rp 17 T	Rp 17 T
EBIT	Rp 2.0 T	Rp 2.1 T	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 2.3 T	Rp 2.4 T	Rp 2.4 T
NOPAT	Rp 1.4 T	Rp 1.5 T	Rp 1.5 T	Rp 1.6 T	Rp 1.6 T	Rp 1.7 T
+ D&A	Rp 549 M	Rp 586 M	Rp 617 M	Rp 641 M	Rp 658 M	Rp 674 M
− Capex	Rp 1.9 T	Rp 2.0 T	Rp 2.1 T	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 1.1 T
− ΔNWC	-Rp 20 M	-Rp 18 M	-Rp 15 M	-Rp 12 M	-Rp 7.9 M	-Rp 8.0 M
FCFF	Rp 77 M	Rp 79 M	Rp 79 M	Rp 78 M	Rp 76 M	Rp 1.3 T
PV	Rp 70 M	Rp 64 M	Rp 58 M	Rp 52 M	Rp 46 M	Rp 9.3 T

Check it yourself: revenue × margin = EBIT · NOPAT = EBIT × (1 − tax) · FCFF = NOPAT + D&A − Capex − ΔNWC · PV = FCFF ÷ (1+WACC)^yr · TV = FCFF(T∞) ÷ (WACC − g), discounted from year 5 · equity = EV − net debt − minority · per share = equity ÷ shares outstanding

EV = PV(explicit) Rp 290 M + PV(TV) Rp 9.3 T = Rp 9.6 T · TV 97% of EV · − net debt Rp 477 M − minority Rp 233 M = equity Rp 8.9 T ÷ shares outstanding

Model output: Rp 687/share (-69% vs price Rp 2,199)· exit-multiple check (11.3x): Rp 1,533

Under these assumptions the model lands 69% below today's price. The market, in other words, is paying for faster growth, a fatter margin, or a lower discount rate than the inputs here assume.

Sensitivity (per share, Rp)

g \ WACC	9.8%	10.8%	11.8%
2.0%	754	633	538
2.5%	824	687	580
3.0%	904	747	627

Model output under the stated assumptions. Every input above comes from the company's own audited record or from cited market data, and every one can be adjusted. This is not a price target and not advice.

Educational analysis. Multiples pair today’s price with the latest audited fiscal year (trailing-FY convention); peer figures are the covered peer sample, not the whole market. Never a price target.

Macro backdropfull backdrop + sensitivity map →

BI Rate 5.75%IDR/USD 18,05810Y government bond yield 7.26%Inflation 3.34%(as-of 2026-07-31)

GDP/consumption ↑(M)Rupiah weaker(M)

Income Statement

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Revenue	Rp 9.4 T	Rp 9.5 T	Rp 11 T	Rp 12 T	Rp 13 T
Cost of Goods Sold	Rp 6.0 T	Rp 6.2 T	Rp 6.9 T	Rp 7.6 T	Rp 8.1 T
Gross Profit	Rp 3.4 T	Rp 3.3 T	Rp 4.2 T	Rp 4.6 T	Rp 4.7 T
Operating Income (EBIT)	Rp 1.1 T	Rp 1.0 T	Rp 1.8 T	Rp 1.6 T	Rp 1.7 T
Interest Expense	Rp 38 M	Rp 38 M	Rp 52 M	Rp 57 M	Rp 123 M
Net Income	Rp 674 M	Rp 696 M	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 902 M	Rp 1.1 T
Net Income Attributable to Owners	Rp 674 M	Rp 696 M	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 902 M	Rp 1.1 T
Depreciation & Amortization	Rp 507 M	Rp 506 M	Rp 478 M	Rp 456 M	Rp 494 M

Balance Sheet

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Cash & Equivalents	Rp 1.9 T	Rp 1.1 T	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 2.1 T	Rp 1.2 T
Accounts Receivable	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 1.4 T	Rp 1.8 T	Rp 1.7 T
Inventory	Rp 302 M	Rp 202 M	Rp 204 M	Rp 202 M	Rp 234 M
Current Assets	Rp 3.5 T	Rp 2.7 T	Rp 3.1 T	Rp 4.3 T	Rp 3.3 T
Total Assets	Rp 9.3 T	Rp 9.7 T	Rp 11 T	Rp 14 T	Rp 14 T
Accounts Payable	Rp 208 M	Rp 174 M	Rp 222 M	Rp 379 M	Rp 424 M
Current Liabilities	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 2.2 T	Rp 2.6 T	Rp 5.1 T	Rp 4.2 T
Total Liabilities	Rp 2.8 T	Rp 2.6 T	Rp 2.9 T	Rp 5.5 T	Rp 4.6 T
Total Interest-Bearing Debt	Rp 565 M	Rp 512 M	Rp 647 M	Rp 2.7 T	Rp 1.6 T
Total Equity	Rp 6.5 T	Rp 7.1 T	Rp 8.0 T	Rp 8.8 T	Rp 9.9 T
Equity Attributable to Owners	Rp 6.4 T	Rp 7.0 T	Rp 7.9 T	Rp 8.6 T	Rp 9.7 T

Cash Flow Statement

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Operating Cash Flow	Rp 2.0 T	Rp 1.7 T	Rp 2.1 T	Rp 2.3 T	Rp 2.5 T
Capital Expenditure	Rp 625 M	Rp 1.2 T	Rp 1.4 T	Rp 1.6 T	Rp 1.8 T

Company Deep Analysis

Reviewed: 2026-07-31

Analyst Verdict

Siloam International Hospitals is Indonesia’s largest private hospital operator by revenue (Rp12.85tn in FY2025, against Hermina’s Rp7.13tn and Mitra Keluarga’s Rp5.37tn), running ~40 hospitals nationwide, with a broad spread across geographies and payers (private plus BPJS). Now controlled by CVC Capital Partners after the Lippo era, it is the scale-and-reach play: margins are solid but mid-tier (EBITDA ~17%, net ~9%) and ROE runs ~10–15%, sitting below premium peer MIKA because its mix is broader, more BPJS-weighted, and still carrying growth investment. It is a scale leader with room for operational improvement under private-equity ownership, and the factors that move it are occupancy, case mix, and BPJS policy.

Business Model

Indonesia’s largest private hospital network by revenue (Rp12.85tn in FY2025), running ~40 hospitals nationwide, serving a broad payer mix (private pay, insurance and BPJS national insurance) across diverse geographies. Controlled by CVC Capital Partners (acquired from the Lippo Group). Revenue is patient services (inpatient + outpatient); profitability turns on occupancy, case mix and operating efficiency across a large, geographically-spread network.

Segments

Inpatient and outpatient services across a nationwide network spanning premium urban hospitals to broader-access regional ones. The wide geographic and payer (incl. BPJS) mix gives scale and reach but mid-tier margins (EBITDA ~17%, net ~9%): below focused-premium MIKA. CVC ownership brings an operational-efficiency agenda.

Value Chain & Positioning

Capacity (hospitals, beds, equipment, doctors) → patient services (inpatient/outpatient) → payment (private/insurance/BPJS). SILO’s margin pool depends on filling capacity (occupancy) with the right case mix; its broad/BPJS-weighted mix and ongoing expansion mean lower margins than premium peers, with efficiency the key lever.

Competitive Forces (Porter’s 5)

Supplier powerMedium

How much leverage input/funding providers have over pricing.

Specialist doctors and medical equipment/consumables (some imported) carry cost power; scale aids procurement.

Implication → Doctor attraction/retention and equipment costs are key; scale gives some leverage.

Buyer powerMedium

How much leverage customers have to push prices down.

BPJS (the national insurer) sets tariffs (INA-CBG) for a large share of patients; private payers/insurers negotiate.

Implication → BPJS tariffs cap margins on that mix: the main reason SILO trails premium peers.

Threat of new entryMedium

How easily new competitors can enter the market.

New hospitals need capital, licensing and doctors, but local single-hospital entrants exist.

Implication → Network scale defends SILO, but local competition is real.

Threat of substitutesLow

Risk that alternative products/services replace demand.

Limited substitutes for hospital care; minor leakage to overseas treatment and clinics.

Implication → Demand is defensive and structurally growing.

Competitive rivalryHigh

Intensity of competition among existing players.

Competes with MIKA, Hermina and others for patients and doctors.

Implication → Pressures pricing/occupancy; scale and network breadth are SILO’s defence.

Moat / Competitive Edge

Moderate. SILO’s moat is network scale and geographic breadth (the largest private hospital footprint), brand and the difficulty of replicating a nationwide system. But its broad, BPJS-weighted mix dilutes margins versus focused-premium MIKA, and hospital care is locally competitive. CVC ownership aims to widen the moat through operational improvement and disciplined growth.

Key Drivers & Sensitivities

Occupancy / patient volume
Bed-occupancy and patient throughput are the core operating lever; filling the large capacity base drives margins.
Case mix (private vs BPJS)
A richer private/complex-case mix lifts margins; a heavier BPJS mix (capped tariffs) dilutes them: the key margin variable.
Capacity expansion
Adding/ramping hospitals drives growth but pressures near-term margins and cash (lease/capex); maturation lifts returns.
BPJS tariffs / policy
BPJS INA-CBG tariffs and coverage shape a large share of revenue; tariff changes move margins.
CVC operational improvement
Private-equity ownership brings an efficiency and capital-discipline agenda: the re-rating lever.

Linkages

Tied to healthcare demand (defensive, structurally growing with insurance penetration), the BPJS national-insurance system, consumer income (private-pay mix) and medical-input/FX costs (equipment). Less cyclical than discretionary sectors; a structural-growth healthcare play.

Recent Developments

FY2023 stands out and the years around it do not. Operating margin reached 15.7% and ROE 15.3% that year, against 10.9% and 10.0% in FY2022 and 13.3% and 11.5% in FY2025, so FY2023 is a peak rather than a new level. EBITDA margin is steadier at 16.2% to 20.0% and net margin ran 7.2% to 10.8%. Revenue grew every year, Rp9.38tn to Rp12.85tn. The line worth watching is liquidity rather than profit: the current ratio fell below 1.0 in FY2024 and FY2025, to 0.85× and 0.79×, having been 1.58× in FY2021, while debt to equity spiked to 0.31× in FY2024 before easing to 0.16×.

Regulation

Regulated by the Ministry of Health (hospital licensing, classification), BPJS-Kesehatan (INA-CBG tariffs for national-insurance patients) and hospital accreditation (KARS). Foreign-ownership and medical-practice rules apply. Listed on the IDX.

ESG & Sustainability

Material issues: quality and safety of care, access/affordability (BPJS), medical-waste management, and workforce (doctors/nurses). Governance reflects CVC (PE) control post-Lippo. Healthcare access across regions is a positive social impact; patient-data privacy and clinical governance are material.

Risks

BPJS tariff/policy pressure on a large patient mix
Margin dilution from broad/BPJS-weighted mix vs premium peers
Expansion execution / leverage (D/E rose to 0.31)
Doctor attraction/retention and medical-cost inflation
Regulatory and clinical-quality risk

Outlook & What to Watch

The scale leader in private hospitals, with operational-improvement upside under CVC ownership. The base case is structural healthcare-demand growth and efficiency gains lifting mid-tier margins; the swing factors are occupancy, case mix and BPJS policy. (Interpretation, not a forecast.)

Key KPIs

EBITDA margin: EBITDA ÷ revenue: mid-tier (~17%)
BOR: Bed-occupancy rate: capacity utilisation
ROE: Net income ÷ equity: ~10–15%
Net margin: Net income ÷ revenue: ~9%
FCF: Free cash flow: positive, funds expansion

Sources

Curated narrative (educational interpretation), backed by the linked sources. The figures above are deterministic. Not investment advice.