Beit Bakfar: How Sensitive the Valuation Really Is
Even after the step down from 2024, fair value gains were still close to Beit Bakfar's full-year net profit. The issue is not the existence of the appraisal, but how quickly a small move in the discount rate can shift value faster than operating improvement.
Why This Follow-up Matters Now
The main article focused on occupancy, capital and the development pipeline. This continuation isolates the valuation layer. It needs to be read on its own because 2025 net profit was NIS 106.7 million, total fair value gains were NIS 99.5 million, and recurring FFO was only NIS 31.7 million. In other words, even after the step down from 2024, reported earnings still leaned heavily on appraisal gains.
The core question is not whether the appraisals are inherently right or wrong. The real question is what actually moves them. Here the company gives a fairly direct answer: a 0.5% increase in the discount rate reduces the fair value of investment property by about 3.38%, while a 1% increase in resident turnover increases it by only about 0.52%. On NIS 1.615 billion of investment property, that means roughly NIS 54.6 million of downside versus only about NIS 8.4 million of upside. That is why, in Beit Bakfar's earnings stack, the discount rate still matters much more than ordinary operating improvement.
This chart does not mix reported and theoretical numbers for effect. It clarifies the sensitivity hierarchy. 2025 looked operationally stable, but it would take only a modest move in the discount rate to wipe out most of the year's fair value gain on stabilized investment property, and far more than the year's recurring FFO.
What The Model Actually Assumes
The fair value of investment property is based on discounted cash flow projections supported by resident and tenant agreements and by actuarial assumptions about resident turnover. At the group-note level, the model uses 10% annual resident turnover and a discount-rate range of 7.25% to 8.0%. In the wider methodological explanation, income is split between a "near replacement" phase and a "future replacement" phase, 1% growth is built into future replacement income, and the turnover of current residents is assumed to play out over an average four-year period.
The more important point is not only the inputs, but the nature of the model itself. The company explains that this is a broad appraisal framework rather than a unit-by-unit model, and that it relies on general assumptions and averages. It also says the discount rate is set at the upper end because the model does not claim to be precise in every parameter.
| Assumption layer | What appears in the model | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Valuation structure | Near replacement plus future normalized replacement | A meaningful part of the value comes from future deposit economics, not only from current-period income |
| Turnover | 10% annual turnover in the group model | Turnover matters, but its measured sensitivity is modest relative to the discount rate |
| Discount rates | 7.75% for deposit cash flows, 8.0% for operating cash flows, 7.25% for rental income in the mature-asset appraisals | A relatively tight valuation band means small changes still move a lot of value |
| Growth | 1% future growth | The model assumes the economics do not stay flat forever |
| Model character | General assumptions and averages rather than a unit-specific build | That makes appraisal quality depend more on the assumptions than on the apparent precision of the final number |
There is another important nuance. In the three mature-property appraisals, Gedera, Hadarim and Bitan Aharon, the language is almost identical: 10 years of average stay, 12% veteran residents with 18 years of stay, 1% growth and the same family of discount rates. That creates consistency, but it also means several large assets depend on nearly the same assumption set.
The Real Sensitivity Sits In The Discount Rate
Once you move into the appraisals themselves, it becomes clear how tightly the model is anchored to the discount rate. In Gedera, a NIS 295.4 million valuation falls to NIS 284.9 million if the discount rate rises from 7.75% to 8.25%. In Hadarim, NIS 607.1 million falls to NIS 585.7 million. In Bitan Aharon, NIS 467.1 million falls to NIS 450.0 million. So a 0.5% move in the discount rate cuts roughly 3.5% to 3.7% from the value of these three mature assets.
Kfar Saba is different and needs to be read separately. That appraisal already values the expanded 231-unit project while the new wing was still in final finishing stages ahead of delivery to new residents. So its sensitivity table is less of a clean stabilized-yield exercise. Even there, however, the direction is the same: value falls from NIS 461.6 million to NIS 448.6 million when the discount rate rises by 0.5%.
That does not automatically mean the appraisals are aggressive. It does mean that Beit Bakfar's reported earnings still sit on a valuation mechanism where a small change in the discount rate can move tens of millions of shekels. In that setup, earnings quality is less stable than the headline net-profit number suggests.
Rising Fair Value Does Not Always Mean Better Occupancy
One of the most useful 2025 signals is that fair value did not move one-for-one with occupancy. In Gedera and Bitan Aharon, value and occupancy both improved, which is the straightforward case. But in Hadarim, value rose to NIS 606.6 million from NIS 583.9 million even as average occupancy slipped to 94.1% from 95.8%. In Kfar Saba, value rose to NIS 246.3 million from NIS 235.2 million even as average occupancy dropped to 81.4% from 91.6%.
That matters because the company explicitly says the main drivers of fair value in 2025 and 2024 were higher apartment price lists, actual transactions completed at those price lists, and higher profitability. Occupancy is clearly important, but it is not the only variable, and in some years it is not even the most decisive one.
This is why the appraisals cannot be read through occupancy alone. A property can show temporary operating pressure and still post a higher fair value if price lists, deposit economics and future replacement assumptions still support the model. That does not prove the value is wrong. It does mean the fair value is a longer-duration appraisal read, not a simple snapshot of current occupancy.
Kfar Saba Is The Real Quality Test For 2026
That is exactly why Kfar Saba deserves the closest scrutiny. On one hand, the operating-asset table shows a sharp drop in occupancy to 81.4%. On the other hand, the expanded-project appraisal already reflects the new building and sits just ahead of delivery to residents. So there are really two layers here: an operating layer that shows temporary weakness, and an appraisal layer that already pulls in the expanded product and its future marketing economics.
This is not a contradiction that needs to be forcibly resolved. It is the gap investors need to monitor. If 2026 brings real occupancy, sustained pricing and a conversion of marketing into NOI, the appraisal will look reasonable in hindsight. If occupancy recovery is slower, or pricing proves softer than the model assumes, Kfar Saba will become the main test of earnings quality.
Bottom Line
Beit Bakfar's appraisals look internally consistent, but 2025 shows that this consistency still rests on a relatively narrow assumption family. The discount rate moves value much more than resident turnover does, and fair value can keep rising even in a year when occupancy at a specific asset weakens. That is why reading 2025 through net profit alone misses the point: earnings are still far more appraisal-led than cash-led.
The thesis now: the question at Beit Bakfar is not whether there is value in the assets, but how quickly that accounting value can move when valuation assumptions shift, and whether actual occupancy, especially in Kfar Saba, will be strong enough to validate the fair-value layer outside the appraisal tables.
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.