GRT Jewellers is taking control of the 162-year-old Mumbai jeweller. This page sets out what GRT could change, what it probably can't, and how much of the change the market price already assumes.
| FY25–26 | GRT Jewellers (unlisted) | TBZ |
|---|---|---|
| Stores | 66, of which 70%+ of revenue from Tamil Nadu | 37 in 28 cities, mainly Maharashtra and Gujarat |
| Revenue | ₹41,246 Cr (FY25, operating income) | ₹3,203 Cr (FY26) |
| Sales per store | ₹500–650 Cr | ~₹87 Cr |
| Operating margin | 3.9% (FY24), 7.0% (FY25) | 6% (FY24), 11% (FY26) |
| Net margin | ~2–3% in normal years | ~6% (FY26) |
| Gold funding | Gold metal loans backed by ₹7,500 Cr+ of fixed deposits | Bank debt of ~₹886 Cr at ~9% |
| Credit rating | AA- (ICRA) | – |
| Gold volume | −11% (FY25), about −18% (FY26) | n/d |
GRT's per-store range depends on whether total operating income or jewellery revenue alone is used. GRT's own volumes are falling, so its recent growth also comes from the gold price.
| Lever | What changes | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Funding | Move TBZ's inventory funding onto GRT-style gold metal loans; ~₹25–35 Cr a year of pre-tax savings | High |
| Design exchange | TBZ studded and jadau lines into GRT's stores (GRT's studded share is low); GRT's temple and plain-gold designs into TBZ's western stores | Medium |
| Store productivity | Merchandising, gold-scheme know-how and faster stock turns (TBZ holds ~249 days of inventory) | Low: treat any convergence as upside |
| Growth (CAGR) | 10 years | 5 years | 3 years | TTM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales | 7% | 19%* | 10% | 29% |
| Net profit | 25% | 36% | 71% | 189% |
*Flattered by a COVID-hit FY21 base. Profit has grown much faster than sales through higher margins. FY26 sales rose 22% and margins stepped up before GRT arrived, but part of FY26's margin came from rising gold prices.
EPS after four years at three profit-growth rates, multiplied by a P/E multiple. Profit growth in the middle case (20% a year) is below every historical profit-growth figure above. Multiples are held at 13–19x, well below Kalyan (40x) and Titan (74x), because TBZ has not shown their scale or growth.
| Scenario | Sales growth | Profit growth | EPS (year 4) | P/E | Implied value | vs ₹673 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cautious | 12% | 11% | ₹46 | 13x | ₹593 | −12% |
| Middle | 17% | 20% | ₹64 | 16x | ₹1,018 | +51% |
| Strong | 22% | 29% | ₹85 | 19x | ₹1,613 | +140% |
| Open-offer price (reference) | – | – | – | – | ₹250 | −63% |
This table is arithmetic on stated assumptions, not a price target or forecast. Spread over four years, the middle case works out to roughly 11% a year from today's price.
| Multiple on TTM EPS ₹32 | P/E | Implied value | vs ₹673 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low-multiple jewellers | 13–15x | ₹416–480 | −38% to −29% |
| Listed-jeweller median | 17x | ₹544 | −19% |
| High-growth jewellers (Kalyan, Thangamayil) | 40–42x | ₹1,280–1,344 | +90% to +100% |
| Titan | 77x | ₹2,464 | +266% |
At 21x, TBZ already trades above the sector median. Most of the further gap to higher multiples has to come from earnings actually growing, not from the multiple alone.
See TBZ against nine listed peers in the Jeweller Peer Scorecard →
Data. Based on publicly available information: company filings, credit-rating reports, open-offer documents, exchange disclosures and market data, as of 25 Sep 2026. Scenario figures are calculations on the stated assumptions.