BHEL shares slide 5% after Q1 net loss widens to Rs 455 crore

Bharat Heavy Electricals (BHEL) shares slid 4.7% to their day’s low of Rs 228.30 on the BSE on Thursday after the company reported a wider consolidated net loss of Rs 455.50 crore for the first quarter of FY26, compared to a loss of Rs 211.40 crore in the same quarter last year.

Total income for the quarter rose slightly to Rs 5,658.07 crore, up from Rs 5,581.78 crore in Q1FY25. However, total expenses increased to Rs 6,279.78 crore from Rs 5,874.98 crore a year ago, weighing on the bottom line.

BHEL said trade receivables includes overdue amount of Rs 211 crore from STPG (formerly NEC Sudan), stuck on account of civil war. This “has been considered good and not provided for as approved by the Board,” the company said.


Net dues of Rs 185 crore were also reported against Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. (RVUNL)/Suratgarh 7 & 8 Project (2x660 MW). Commenting on the same, BHEL said creation of provision is not prudent on the basis of recoverability as the customer has issued an amendment for delivery extension, confirmed that payment is under process, and will remit the amount shortly.

“Customer (RVUNL) has paid an amount of Rs 90 Cr in FY 2025-26 (till 31.07.25) out of which Rs 50 crore is received on July 21, 2025,” the company added.

Also Read: These 10 stocks delivered consistent dividend yields over the last 3 years

BHEL shares price target

According to Trendlyne, the average target price for BHEL stands at Rs 233, implying a 3% downside from current levels. The stock has a ‘Hold’ rating from 18 analysts.

BHEL shares closed 3.4% lower at Rs 239.6 on Wednesday, underperforming the benchmark Sensex, which declined 0.21%. The stock is down 17% over the past 12 months but has gained 142% in the last two years. The company’s market capitalisation stands at Rs 83,447 crore.

Also Read: PNB Housing Finance, RBL Bank among 10 small-cap stocks where FIIs increased stake in Q1

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)