Abu Megurim: Between Fair-Value Gains and NOI That Actually Reaches Shareholders
Abu Megurim ended 2025 with NIS 7.8 million of net profit, but that headline sat on top of NIS 36.0 million of fair-value gains while AFFO was only NIS 4.7 million. This follow-up tests whether the appraised values, implied yields and the cash that actually reaches shareholders are telling the same story.
The main article argued that Abu Megurim's fast portfolio expansion has already pushed the story away from "is there value here?" and toward "can the company fund, deliver and actually capture that value?" This continuation isolates the next question inside that thesis: do fair-value gains, NOI and the cash that really reaches shareholders sit on the same economic foundation.
The short answer is no, at least not yet. In 2025 the company recorded NIS 36.0 million of fair-value gains on investment property. In the same year, NOI was NIS 20.0 million, net profit was NIS 7.8 million, FFO was NIS 0.9 million, AFFO was NIS 4.7 million, and operating cash flow was slightly negative after listing expenses. In other words, accounting value creation is already running ahead, while shareholder-level economics are still far behind.
That does not mean the appraisals are detached from reality. Quite the opposite: the valuation appendix gives them meaningful anchors, including reference deals at 6.7% to 6.78% NOI yields, a NIS 128.2 million valuation for the Oren 33 Haifa cluster, and further value uplift in Ashdod assets. The problem is different. Value sits at the asset layer, while friction sits at the listed-company layer. Between the two sit financing, corporate overhead, financial liabilities, repayment schedules and a portfolio that still does not generate full-period NOI across the board.
The gap starts with the measurement layer
The key number here is not net profit but the distance between the metrics. The 2025 fair-value gain was about 80% larger than annual NOI, 4.6 times net profit, and 7.7 times AFFO. Even if listing costs are stripped out, operating cash generation still sits nowhere near the fair-value uplift.
The company effectively says as much itself. It explicitly notes that NOI does not reflect the cash available to fund all cash needs and does not indicate what can actually be distributed. That is the core issue. NOI is an asset-level metric. Shareholders live one layer below, after overhead, financing costs, repayments and other liabilities.
The chart makes the point better than any slogan. Even if NOI is accepted as the right operating metric, only a small part of it currently reaches the equity layer:
| Layer | 2025, NIS million | As % of NOI |
|---|---|---|
| NOI | 20.048 | 100% |
| AFFO, management approach | 4.656 | 23% |
| FFO, securities-authority approach | 0.911 | 4.5% |
| Operating cash flow after listing costs | (0.146) | negative |
This is more than a one-year accounting oddity tied to the merger. It is a reminder that what looks strong at the asset layer still has not fully settled at the equity layer.
The appraisals are not absurd, but they are not liquid either
The Oren 33 Haifa cluster was valued at NIS 128.17 million, excluding VAT. The same appraisal includes an important caveat: the value assumes full registration of ownership to Abu Family REIT and receipt of an annual approval from Dira Lehaskir. So even at the asset level, the figure is not a frictionless number detached from operating and legal conditions.
The pricing backdrop is not groundless either. In the same appendix, two Abu Family reference transactions are cited: the completion of the remaining rights in the Rehovot cluster at a 6.7% NOI yield, and the Kiryat Ata memorandum of understanding at a 6.78% NOI yield. But the same note also says that based on 2025 income, the two Rehovot transactions together imply a 5.95% NOI yield.
That gap matters. It does not prove the valuation is inflated, but it does show that the implied-yield story depends not only on transaction prices, but also on whether actual NOI has already caught up with what those transaction prices assume. In 2025, that catch-up still looks incomplete.
| Asset | 2025 value, ex VAT | 2024 value, ex VAT | What it says |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oren 33 cluster, Haifa | NIS 128.17 million | n/a | The largest of the three cases, and explicitly conditioned on full title registration and annual approval |
| 20 apartments at 30 Kinnor, Ashdod | NIS 53.75 million | NIS 47.37 million | About 13.5% value uplift in one year |
| Harzitz 1-3, Ashdod | NIS 30.25 million | NIS 28.80 million | About 5.0% value uplift, and the annual report already shows the asset moving from advances into investment property |
What matters is the mix of value. The Haifa cluster is a cash-flow asset. The Ashdod assets show valuation uplift through apartment-level appraisals. Both are legitimate at the asset layer. But for shareholders, those two routes are still very different in terms of certainty, timing and cash accessibility.
The shareholder test starts with the balance-sheet structure
The March 2026 investor presentation makes clear how balance-sheet driven this story still is. Out of total assets of NIS 830.0 million, NIS 468.1 million already sits in investment property, NIS 235.9 million in advances on account of investment property, and NIS 66.6 million in land and investment property under construction. Only NIS 59.5 million sits in cash, financial assets, receivables and other current balances.
Put differently, about 93% of the balance sheet still sits in real-estate, development and advance-payment layers. That is not automatically a negative for a growing residential REIT, but it does explain why fair-value gains do not automatically become accessible cash. The value still needs to travel through more stages: closing acquisitions, completion, full operation, refinancing or realization.
The bridge between appraised value and shareholder economics is also weakened by the liability stack. At the end of 2025 the company had negative working capital of about NIS 101 million. The two big drivers were a NIS 76.8 million fair-value financial liability and a roughly NIS 72.3 million Rehovot loan that was classified as current based on its June 2026 maturity. The company notes that Rehovot's fair value was NIS 105 million at year-end, implying a 69% loan-to-value ratio, and expects a refinancing to be completed. But until that happens, the value remains mostly a balance-sheet argument rather than cash in hand.
Post-balance-sheet events reinforce the same reading. About half of the investor liability was settled through share issuance, while the remaining roughly NIS 40 million was paid in cash. That is exactly the kind of friction that matters here: asset values can rise, while listed-company liabilities still consume real liquidity immediately.
Bottom line: the value is there, but it has not traveled all the way down
The main point of this continuation is not that the appraisals are fictional. Based on the selected evidence set, they have meaningful support. The Haifa cluster is framed against a market backdrop and deal-yield range that looks reasonable, and the Ashdod assets do show genuine year-on-year value increases.
But shareholders do not own the asset-layer story in isolation. They only benefit from whatever makes it through the listed-company layer. And at that layer, 2025 still does not deliver a clean picture: FFO of NIS 0.9 million, AFFO of NIS 4.7 million, operating cash flow roughly flat after listing costs, negative working capital, and financing pressure that remained central even after the equity raise and the post-balance-sheet events.
So the 2026 test is not whether there will be another appraisal uplift. The real test is whether NOI from acquired and delivered assets starts showing up fully in AFFO, cash flow and refinancing capacity. If that happens, the gap between fair-value gains and shareholder-accessible economics can close relatively quickly. If it does not, Abu Megurim may keep reporting higher paper value while leaving investors with the same unresolved question: how much of that value is actually making it through to equity.
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.