Penthouse: How much of 2025 profit actually reached cash
On a consolidated basis Penthouse posted NIS 170.1 million of net profit in 2025, but operating cash flow was negative NIS 9.8 million. Even at the parent level, only NIS 3.4 million of profit reached cash, so the year-end cash balance depended mainly on financing and financial-asset sales.
What This Follow-up Is Isolating
The main article already showed that 2025 looked strong mostly because of property revaluations and a bargain-purchase gain, while consolidated operating cash flow remained negative. This follow-up isolates one narrower question: how much of 2025 profit actually reached cash, and at which layer.
For that question, the right lens is all-in cash flexibility. This is not an attempt to estimate what the projects may eventually generate once they mature. It is a much simpler test of what happened in 2025: how much of reported profit became operating cash, how much cash was left at year-end, and who actually funded the gap.
| Layer | 2025 net profit | Operating cash flow | Cash conversion | What mainly kept cash away from profit | Year-end cash balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consolidated | NIS 170.1 million | Negative NIS 9.8 million | Negative 5.8% | NIS 180.6 million of property revaluations and NIS 69.2 million of bargain-purchase gain | NIS 280.7 million |
| Parent company | NIS 130.1 million | NIS 3.4 million | 2.6% | NIS 122.1 million of share in profits from investees | NIS 111.4 million |
That table already tells the core story. Profit in 2025 was real in an accounting sense, but in cash terms it barely reached the company, and it certainly did not move cleanly up to the parent.
Consolidated: NIS 170 million of profit, negative operating cash flow
On a consolidated basis, the answer to the headline question is close to zero. Net profit reached NIS 170.1 million, but the cash-flow statement shows NIS 9.8 million used in operating activities. In plain terms, 2025 did not convert profit into operating cash. It did the opposite.
The reason is clear. Two non-cash lines alone, NIS 180.6 million from investment-property revaluation and NIS 69.2 million from bargain-purchase accounting, add up to NIS 249.9 million. That is more than the entire year’s net profit. Even after other adjustments that helped the bridge, mainly finance and deferred-tax items, depreciation, and the NIS 23.2 million impairment at Mevaseret, the accounting profit still did not reach cash.
What makes the read even stricter is that working-capital lines barely helped. Changes in receivables, payables, and other balances added only NIS 0.7 million, while net taxes took away another NIS 0.6 million. There was no hidden operating-cash support behind the scenes. The liquidity section uses a slightly softer rounded number of about NIS 9.0 million of negative operating cash flow, but the hard conversion test should lean on the cash-flow statement itself, and that number is negative.
There is another important forensic detail here. Consolidated investing cash flow was deeply negative at NIS 146.9 million, but even that number was already softened by NIS 30.6 million of cash that came with the subsidiary first consolidated during the year. In other words, outside the operating line as well, the group still consumed substantial cash to carry 2025.
Parent-only: NIS 130 million of profit, only NIS 3.4 million of cash
If the hope was that the gap disappears at the parent-company layer, the numbers say otherwise. The parent ended 2025 with NIS 130.1 million of net profit, but only NIS 3.4 million of operating cash flow. That is a conversion rate of about 2.6%. From the parent’s cash perspective, almost all of the year’s profit remained above the cash line.
The reason is different from the consolidated bridge, but not less important. NIS 122.1 million of profit came from the parent’s share in profits of investees. On top of that, the parent booked NIS 12.8 million of fair-value gains on marketable securities and NIS 2.2 million of investment-property revaluation. Those lines lift equity and profit, but they are not the same thing as cash entering the parent’s account. Even after the remaining adjustments, working capital, and taxes, only NIS 3.4 million of operating cash was left.
In other words, the parent reported a very profitable year before it proved that this profit was truly available to it in cash. That is exactly the gap that matters in holding-and-development structures: profit higher up the chain is not the same as cash moving higher up the chain.
Even the parent’s year-end cash balance of NIS 111.4 million does not sit in a vacuum. The standalone balance sheet already included NIS 58.7 million of deferred consideration for the purchase of subsidiary shares, NIS 141.2 million of net bonds, and NIS 28.4 million of long-term bank debt. So the cash balance is better read as a working buffer against real obligations, not as proof that earnings already rolled into cash.
What Actually Filled the Cash Box
On a consolidated basis, year-end cash was not built by operations. Operating activities consumed NIS 9.8 million, investing activities consumed NIS 146.9 million, and financing activities added NIS 434.9 million. Almost the entire answer sits in the financing line, and especially in NIS 430.9 million of net bond issuance proceeds.
At the parent level, the message is similar even if the mechanism is slightly different. The parent generated only NIS 3.4 million of operating cash flow, but it also benefited from NIS 49.7 million of positive investing cash flow and NIS 55.8 million of positive financing cash flow. That investing inflow did not come from the real-estate platform. It came mainly from NIS 352.0 million of sales of financial assets against NIS 287.7 million of purchases. So even at the parent level, the cash balance was built through capital markets and portfolio management, not through ordinary operating cash generation from the assets.
That point matters a great deal at Penthouse. The year-end cash position looks impressive, but it does not describe a mature cash-generating engine. It describes an open financing window and a financial-asset base that could still be monetized along the way.
What This Says, and What It Does Not
This is not a going-concern point, and it matters not to overstate it. At year-end the company reported positive working capital of NIS 15.8 million on a consolidated basis and NIS 72.2 million at the parent level, and the board explicitly says liquidity risk is low based on more than NIS 280 million of group cash and the ability to refinance loans. That is a statement about visible liquidity.
But liquidity is not cash conversion. A company can be liquid for now and still show profit that did not enter cash. That is exactly what happened here. 2025 built equity, expanded the balance sheet, and bought the group time. It barely built operating cash flow relative to the profit reported.
So the right reading of 2025 works through three layers. Profit built equity. Financing built cash. Operations barely built the cash box. Until those three layers converge, the same accounting profit should not also be treated as if it were a cash profit.
Conclusion
The answer to the headline is short: very little. On a consolidated basis, 2025 profit did not even become positive operating cash flow, but ended in negative NIS 9.8 million. At the parent level, only NIS 3.4 million reached cash out of NIS 130.1 million of net profit.
That is the real point at Penthouse. 2025 proved that the balance sheet can inflate quickly, but it did not yet prove that profit can move up the structure and become cash that is genuinely free at the parent. Until that changes, the year-end cash balance is better read as the product of financing and asset monetization, not as evidence of high earnings-to-cash conversion.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.