Overseas: How Much of Logistics-Services Growth Really Came From the Market, and How Much From the Group
Overseas reported 14.5% growth in its logistics-services segment in 2025, but almost half of that increase came from higher work with companies in the controlling shareholder’s group. That does not cancel the improvement, because external activity still grew, but it does make the market signal less clean than the headline suggests.
What This Follow-Up Is Isolating
The main article focused on the 2025 cash test. This continuation isolates a narrower question: how much of the year’s surprise in logistics services really came from the market, and how much was fed from inside the group itself.
That matters because at first glance this looks like the cleanest growth engine at Overseas. Revenue in logistics services rose to ILS 158.1 million from ILS 138.1 million, while gross profit jumped to ILS 26.3 million from ILS 16.3 million. Gross margin climbed to 16.6% from 11.8%. On the surface, that looks like a straightforward external breakout.
That is only a partial read. The improvement is real, but it is less clean than the headline. External activity in the segment still grew nicely, but almost half of the annual increase came from expanded work with companies in the controlling shareholder’s group.
How Much Came From the Market, and How Much From the Group
The filing separates segment revenue from service revenue provided to companies in the controlling shareholder’s group. It also states that those services are provided within the integrated-logistics activity, in the ordinary course of business, and on market terms. That is important because the question here is not whether the related-party revenue was disclosed as unusual support. The question is whether 2025 proves broad external market strength as clearly as the headline implies.
The numbers are sharp:
| Item | 2024 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logistics-services segment revenue | ILS 138.1 million | ILS 158.1 million | ILS 20.0 million |
| Service revenue from companies in the controlling shareholder’s group | ILS 6.0 million | ILS 15.7 million | ILS 9.7 million |
| Estimated external revenue inside the segment | ILS 132.1 million | ILS 142.3 million | ILS 10.3 million |
| Related-party share of the segment | 4.4% | 10.0% | 5.6 percentage points |
The practical meaning is that, based on the disclosed figures, about 48.6% of the segment’s annual growth came from increased work with companies in the controlling shareholder’s group, while about 51.4% came from external activity. In other words, the external signal is positive, but weaker than the headline. If the headline says 14.5% growth, the cleaner read is that external activity grew by about 7.8%, while group-related work surged by 161%.
That is why two things can be true at the same time. First, 2025 was not just an internal transfer story. Even after the adjustment, about 90% of the segment’s revenue still came from outside the group, and external activity still expanded by more than ILS 10 million. Second, the segment cannot be read as a completely clean proof of market-share gains, because almost half of the increase sits on a layer tied to the controlling shareholder’s ecosystem.
Where the Growth Actually Showed Up
The service-type split adds another layer. The 2025 increase did not come only from transport and distribution. It came mainly from storage-heavy lines:
| Service type | 2024 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free-status storage | ILS 76.1 million | ILS 82.4 million | ILS 6.3 million |
| Bonded storage | ILS 24.9 million | ILS 34.0 million | ILS 9.1 million |
| Cold storage | ILS 18.6 million | ILS 19.8 million | ILS 1.1 million |
| Transport and distribution | ILS 18.4 million | ILS 21.9 million | ILS 3.5 million |
The most important datapoint here is bonded storage. By itself, it accounted for about 45.5% of the segment’s total increase. Together, bonded storage and free-status storage generated more than three quarters of the annual growth. That means the 2025 surprise was driven mainly by deeper warehouse activity, not only by more kilometers of distribution.
This also fits management’s explanation that the improvement came from more stored goods, higher warehouse occupancy, broader business activity, and new customers. But it is still important to stay precise: the disclosure does not let us say how much of each service line came from Profilon, how much from other related companies, and how much from new outside customers. So it is fair to say that the segment benefited from fuller warehouses and broader activity. It is not fair to assign each service bucket to one client set with certainty.
What the Profilon Agreement Adds, and What It Does Not Prove
This is where business visibility and market proof diverge. On December 24, 2024, the audit committee approved an agreement with A.B. Profilon Marketing, a private company under the indirect control of the controlling shareholder, for a 4-year term starting on January 1, 2025. The services include storage, picking, and transportation.
On one hand, this is supportive. The agreement gives the segment a layer of activity with a defined duration, and it fits exactly the places where most of the growth showed up, storage and transportation. In other words, part of the 2025 jump rests on a contract with visibility, not only on spot activity.
On the other hand, this is not pure external market validation. Profilon sits inside the same wider group, and the filing lists several other group companies that also receive logistics services from Overseas. So the Profilon agreement improves the segment’s visibility, but at the same time it weakens any attempt to read 2025 as a fully clean external-market breakout.
The right read is therefore double-sided: the Profilon contract means that at least part of the revenue base now has a clearer time frame into 2026, but for exactly that reason it also shows that part of the uplift came from within the group, not only from the open market.
Why the Fourth Quarter Matters More Than the Full-Year Headline
If the goal is to judge growth quality, the fourth quarter matters even more than the annual headline. It gives a quieter signal:
| Item | Q4 2024 | Q4 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logistics-services segment revenue | ILS 40.3 million | ILS 40.1 million | -0.6% |
| Gross profit | ILS 4.2 million | ILS 6.7 million | 60.0%+ |
| Gross margin | 10.4% | 16.8% | 6.4 percentage points |
That is a key datapoint. By the end of 2025, the segment was no longer showing additional top-line acceleration, but it was extracting much more gross profit from almost the same revenue base. In other words, the year finished with better operating quality on a similar sales base, not with a fresh spike in growth.
That is good for margin quality, but it also puts a limit on the extrapolation. Anyone projecting the full 14.5% annual growth rate straight into 2026 is ignoring the fact that the last quarter of 2025 already looked more like a utilization, mix, and operating-efficiency story than a story of continuing sales acceleration.
Bottom Line on Growth Quality
Overseas’ logistics-services segment did improve in 2025. This is not an artificial number, and it is not only a related-party story. External activity in the segment still grew by more than ILS 10 million, and profitability improved sharply.
But a more disciplined read has to split the headline in two. Almost half of the segment’s increase came from expanded work with companies in the controlling shareholder’s group. The related-party share of the segment more than doubled, from 4.4% to 10.0%. The Profilon agreement adds a layer of visibility and takes some uncertainty out of the base, but that same fact also makes 2025 a less clean proof of external market penetration.
So the right conclusion is not that the market was completely wrong, but also not that it got a full proof of breakout quality. The cleaner version is this: Overseas ended 2025 with a mix of real external growth and deeper group-related work, and by year-end it was able to convert that revenue base into a much stronger gross margin.
What will decide the quality of the story in 2026 is not whether the segment remains large. It is whether the external layer keeps growing at a credible pace without another jump in the group share, and whether the new margin level can hold even in quarters that do not surprise on revenue.
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.