Skip to content

QUANT REPORT — THG (Thonburi Healthcare Group PCL)

Data window actually usable in this package: 60 sessions, 2026-03-26 → 2026-06-23 (55 real trading days after dropping 5 zero-volume carry-forward stubs flagged by audit). The 2,076-row 10y CSV is referenced at a local path but not provided in the package; no SET-index, sector, FX, oil, or rate series provided. Almost all "10y" statistics below are therefore not computed from the package — they are flagged as unavailable. Where I report a number, I show what data window produced it.


1. Return statistics

Metric THG (60d window, n=54 log-returns) SET Index
Mean daily log-return −0.20% n/a — series not in package
Annualised drift (×252) −50% (window-only, not representative) n/a
Daily σ ~2.5% n/a
Annualised σ (×√252) ~40% n/a
Skew negative (driven by 5/13 −4.5%, 6/19 −3.3%) — n≈54 too small for stable estimate n/a
Kurtosis elevated (one +9.6% day on 3/31 dominates) — unstable at n=54 n/a
Sharpe (window) strongly negative; not meaningful at this n n/a
Window max DD −21.9% peak-to-trough (9.35 on 3/31 → 7.30 on 6/23) n/a
10y vol / Sharpe / max DD NOT IN PACKAGE — cannot report n/a

Caveat: this window is post-RAM-recap + post-Boon-overhang. It is a small, biased slice. Pre-2024 returns would be from a structurally different capital structure (110%+ more shares outstanding post-raises). Combining old and new into one 10y vol estimate is statistically questionable even if the file were present.


2. Volatility regimes

Cannot run an HMM or rolling-60d-vol segmentation — full 10y series not provided. From qualitative inflection points in the dossier + window:

Regime Approx. dates Character
Pre-scandal … → Sep 2024 n/a in package
Crisis Sep 2024 → Mar 2025 Boon flees, arrest warrants, RAM PP announced
Recap / re-rating Mar 2025 → late 2025 PP at ฿8.65, RO at ฿5.00, share count +~111%
Post-recap fade (current) ~Q1 2026 → now window shows steady drift 9.35 → 7.30 on rising-volume down days; annualised σ ~40%

Current regime: post-recap fade, elevated vol, negative drift.


3. Beta & factor exposures

Cannot compute. No SET, sector ETF (HELTH), USD/THB, oil, US10Y, or China property series in the package. The audit also confirms no peer multi-year price series, no income statement, no shareholder file. All of the following are therefore unavailable:

  • β to SET (5y / 10y)
  • β to oil, USD/THB, US10Y, China property
  • Style factor ranks (value / size / momentum / quality / yield)
  • Dividend yield rank

Qualitative prior only (not estimated from data): hospital names typically have β_SET in 0.6–0.9, low oil sensitivity, modest USD/THB sensitivity via medical-tourism revenue. THG-specific β is likely destabilised by the 2024–25 idiosyncratic shocks (scandal + recap) — regression betas across that window would be near-meaningless.


4. Mean reversion vs trend

  • Hurst exponent / variance-ratio test: cannot compute from 55 returns with statistical reliability (need ≥ 500). Not reported.
  • Window evidence: 12 of 14 down-days < −1% are followed by another down or flat day → short-term momentum, not mean reversion, in the current regime. But n is tiny.
  • Structural anchors that any mean-reversion model would point to:
  • RAM private-placement price ฿8.65 (Mar 2025) — informed-buyer print
  • Rights-offering price ฿5.00 — discounted, dilution-driven
  • 60-day VWAP-equivalent (simple mean of 55 closes) ≈ ฿7.94
  • Dossier 52-wk high ฿38.50 is pre-recap and not a valid anchor for the post-dilution share base.

Implication: at the 2y horizon the relevant equilibrium is somewhere between the RO price (฿5.00) and the PP price (฿8.65), not the pre-dilution chart.


5. Drawdown profile

From the 60-session window only:

Metric Value
Window peak ฿9.35 (2026-03-31)
Window trough ฿7.25 intraday / ฿7.30 close (2026-06-23)
Window max DD −21.9%
Days peak→trough ~57 trading days, no recovery yet
Largest 1-day drop −4.5% (2026-05-13)
Largest 1-day gain +9.6% (2026-03-31)

Full 10y max-DD: NOT IN PACKAGE. Given the dossier's ฿38.50 → ฿7.30 path, the 10y max DD is plausibly ~−80%, but I will not state that as computed.


6. 2-year forecast — model comparison

Assumptions stated for each model. Spot ฿7.30. σ used = 40% annualised (window estimate). r_f set to 0 for simplicity (Thai 10y not in package).

Model 12m point 12m 90% CI 24m point 24m 90% CI
GBM, drift=0 (vol-only random walk, σ=40%) ฿7.30 [฿3.95, ฿13.50] ฿7.30 [฿3.10, ฿17.20]
GBM, window drift (μ=−50%/yr, σ=40%, naive extrapolation — do not trust) ฿4.45 [฿2.40, ฿8.20] ฿2.70 [฿1.15, ฿6.40]
Mean reversion to PP anchor (target ฿8.65, half-life ~12m, σ=40%) ฿7.95 [฿4.95, ฿12.75] ฿8.40 [฿4.45, ฿15.85]
Multi-factor regression n/a — factor series not in package
Naive EPS × P/E (FY25 EPS ฿0.054 × peer 16x = ฿0.86; ×35x bull = ฿1.89; ×100x momentum = ฿5.40) ฿0.86 – ฿5.40 wide depends on EPS trajectory not in package
Median of usable models ~฿7.30–7.95 [฿4, ฿13] ~฿7.30–8.40 [฿3, ฿16]

Notes on each forecast

  • GBM drift=0 is my preferred central case. It says: "spot is the best forecast; vol bands tell you the dispersion." 90% bands at 24m span roughly ฿3 → ฿17.
  • GBM window-drift is shown for completeness but is structurally wrong: a 60-day window cannot pin long-run drift, and ฿2.70 sits below the rights-offering price RAM just paid — economically implausible without further dilution.
  • Mean reversion to ฿8.65 assumes the RAM PP price is the informed-buyer fair value. This pulls 24m point estimate to ~฿8.40.
  • Naive EPS×P/E demolishes the bull case at face value: at ฿0.054 EPS × peer 16x = ฿0.86. The market is already paying ~135x trailing — i.e. the recovery is priced in. To justify ฿7.30 needs net profit ~฿800m (8× FY25); to justify the owner's ฿30 needs ~฿3.3bn (35× FY25). EPS path not in package, so I cannot forecast it.
  • GBM ignores fat tails. This stock has had idiosyncratic shocks (Boon flees; PP announced; recap completed) that drive returns far outside Gaussian. Real tails are wider than CIs shown — particularly to the downside (Boon legal verdict, RAM strategic shift) and upside (M&A premium if RAM moves to consolidate above 50%).

7. Where models disagree and why

  • GBM-drift=0 (฿7.30) vs Naive EPS×P/E (฿0.86–฿5.40): market is pricing forward earnings recovery that is invisible in trailing fundamentals. If FY26 EPS doesn't double-or-better, the EPS×P/E model wins and price compresses toward ~฿2–฿5.
  • Mean-reversion (฿8.40) vs GBM-window-drift (฿2.70): the PP anchor says "informed buyer paid ฿8.65 13 months ago" — a fundamentals-grounded floor. The drift extrapolation says "recent tape is bleeding" — a momentum signal. These are incompatible without resolution of the Boon legal overhang.
  • All models assume no further dilution and no further share issuance. Share count has already grown ~111% in 18 months; another raise would compress all targets by ~the dilution factor.

8. Confidence: LOW

Limits of this analysis

  1. No 10y price file in this package — annualised return, vol, Sharpe, max-DD, Hurst, regime model are all uncomputable here. Numbers above are 60-session only.
  2. No benchmark / factor series — no β, no factor decomposition, no R².
  3. No financials beyond dossier line-items — EPS path, EBITDA, post-recap net debt all unverified; the Naive model uses one data point (FY25 EPS = ฿0.054).
  4. Structural break in 2025 (RAM PP + RO, share count +111%, debt repaid) makes any pre-2025 statistic mechanically incomparable to post-2025. A clean 10y vol/drift estimate is statistically not the right object for this name.
  5. Fat-tail risk both ways: Boon legal resolution, RAM strategic move (>50% consolidation or full TO), or a Thai hospital sector re-rating are all binary catalysts not captured by GBM.
  6. Stocktwits ticker collision (NYSE:THG = Hanover Insurance) — discarded entirely per audit.

Bottom line forecast (median of models I can compute, 24m): ฿7–฿9 central, 90% CI ~฿3–฿16. The owner's ฿30 sits >2 standard deviations above even the wide GBM band and requires an EPS trajectory not supportable from any number in this package.