Marco Secure Solutions Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does: executes engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) projects for fire safety, MEP (mechanical, electrical and plumbing), building management systems, data centre and IT infrastructure and electronic security, plus design consulting and annual maintenance; EPC was 97.28% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.188).

Who pays it: builders and owners of commercial, residential, IT, banking, government and defence premises. Real estate customers were 76.27% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.188). The customers are not named; the largest was 23.41% of FY26 revenue and the top ten 76.11% (DRHP p.42).

Why it is raising money: ₹1,800.00 lakh for working capital and ₹757.55 lakh to pay for an office at Baner, Pune, plus general corporate purposes not yet sized (DRHP p.112).

How fast it has grown: revenue from ₹606.97 lakh in FY24 to ₹3,317.87 lakh in FY26, a CAGR of 133.8%; profit from ₹25.41 lakh to ₹829.08 lakh, a CAGR of 471.2% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.77).

The one thing to understand: the business is small, young and concentrated. It had 24 employees at March 2026 (DRHP p.206), took 99.69% of FY26 revenue from Maharashtra (DRHP p.38), and its EBITDA margin went from 6.00% in FY24 to 33.50% in FY26 (DRHP p.127).

02The business, in plain words

The company does not manufacture. It buys fire alarms, sprinklers, pumps, cables, CCTV cameras, networking gear and building controllers from suppliers and equipment makers, and installs, tests and commissions them in buildings under contract (DRHP p.35, DRHP p.190). It has no plant and no installed capacity (DRHP p.205).

A developer or building owner awards a fire safety or MEP package → the company designs it, buys the equipment and runs the site crews and subcontractors → it commissions the system and hands it over → it is paid against certified milestones or measured quantities, and sometimes keeps a maintenance contract.

It started in 2019 as a fire safety contractor and later added MEP, building management, data centre and security work (DRHP p.186). It says it has completed over 200 projects across six states (DRHP p.187). It holds a Class A fire licence from the Maharashtra Fire Service and a DRDO contractor enlistment (DRHP p.33). A 51% subsidiary, Marco AIoT Technologies Private Limited, formed on April 4, 2025, develops AI and IoT software for project monitoring (DRHP p.187, DRHP p.228).

Contracts are either fixed price (a set sum for a set scope) or item rate (paid on quantities actually executed). Fixed-price work fell from 58.78% of revenue in FY25 to 25.48% in FY26 (DRHP p.325).

Earnings equation: Revenue = projects handed over × average project value. FY26: 32 projects at an average of ₹103.68 lakh (DRHP p.28). Purchases of materials and subcontracted labour were ₹1,989.67 lakh, 59.97% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.77, DRHP p.326).

03Where the money comes from

Source: DRHP p.42, DRHP p.325, DRHP p.328, DRHP p.329.

Source: DRHP p.188.

Revenue depends on a few customers. In FY25 one customer paid ₹1,515.60 lakh, 56.52% of revenue; in FY26 the same position was ₹776.72 lakh, 23.41% (DRHP p.325). The document says that project moved past its peak and new customers replaced the revenue; customers billed went from 42 to 87 (DRHP p.325). Geography is concentrated: Maharashtra was 100.00% of FY24, 99.67% of FY25 and 99.69% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.38).

04The growth record

Source: DRHP p.76, DRHP p.78, DRHP p.127. PAT margin is on total income, as the document defines it (DRHP p.128). FY26 net worth includes ₹12.85 lakh of minority interest (DRHP p.76).

Revenue CAGR FY24 to FY26 is 133.8% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.77; the document states 133.80% on DRHP p.28). EBITDA CAGR is 452.6% and PAT CAGR is 471.2% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.127). EBITDA margin moved up 2,750 basis points, from 6.00% to 33.50% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.127). Year on year, revenue grew 341.79% in FY25 and 23.73% in FY26 (DRHP p.28).

05What the growth is made of

Mostly the number of projects, not their size. Projects handed over went from 6 in FY24 to 26 in FY25 and 32 in FY26, while average project size stayed near ₹101.16 lakh, ₹103.13 lakh and ₹103.68 lakh (DRHP p.28). One customer explains most of the FY25 jump: its billing rose from ₹267.57 lakh to ₹1,515.60 lakh, about 60.16% of that year's increase in revenue (DRHP p.328).

The margin gain has two parts the document names. Purchases fell from 73.81% of revenue in FY24 to 67.08% in FY25 and 59.97% in FY26, which the document calls the single largest contributor in FY26 (DRHP p.326, DRHP p.329). Employee cost fell from 16.09% of total income in FY24 to 3.34% in FY26 (DRHP p.323). In FY26, ₹25.00 lakh of subsidiary staff remuneration was capitalised as an intangible asset rather than expensed, and no director incentives were paid, against ₹35.00 lakh in FY25 (DRHP p.326).

The document does not break revenue into price and volume within a project, so the fall in purchases cannot be separated into better buying terms, a lighter scope of supply, or the shift from fixed-price to item-rate contracts.

06Earnings quality

The gap between profit and cash is receivables and retentions. Trade receivables rose from ₹196.30 lakh to ₹1,364.60 lakh over two years (DRHP p.76). Of the March 2026 balance, ₹297.25 lakh, 21.8%, was more than 180 days old, against ₹9.97 lakh a year earlier (our arithmetic, DRHP p.275). Retention money held back by customers was a further ₹247.61 lakh (DRHP p.275). Taxes paid of ₹333.73 lakh also took more than half of FY26 operating cash before tax of ₹679.98 lakh (DRHP p.78).

07The balance sheet

At March 2026 the company owed ₹10.00 lakh, an unsecured loan repayable on demand from promoter Chandasudha Goswami, and had ₹60.07 lakh of cash (DRHP p.337, DRHP p.79). The two bank overdrafts, with limits of ₹22.50 lakh and ₹59.80 lakh, were closed during FY26 (DRHP p.327). There are no contingent liabilities (DRHP p.80). The registered office is on a leave and licence agreement running to December 31, 2026 (DRHP p.58).

Source: DRHP p.76, DRHP p.275.

The office purchase is a capital commitment of ₹864.61 lakh, of which ₹107.06 lakh has been paid from internal accruals (DRHP p.114). A post-issue balance sheet cannot be drawn because the issue amount is blank. For scale: the two named objects total ₹2,557.55 lakh, 1.8 times the March 2026 net worth (our arithmetic, DRHP p.112, DRHP p.76).

08What the money is for

Source: DRHP p.112.

Working capital: ₹1,000.00 lakh in FY27 and ₹800.00 lakh in FY28 (DRHP p.113). The company plans on receivable days of 150 and payable days of 100 in both years (DRHP p.116). In the projection table the net working capital totals for FY27 and FY28 appear under each other's column headings: FY28 current assets less current liabilities is ₹2,846.05 lakh, not the ₹1,924.21 lakh printed beneath it (our arithmetic, DRHP p.116).

Office: about 2,112 sq ft of carpet area with 5,819 sq ft of terrace at Teerth Exchange, Baner, bought from Param Landmark LLP under an agreement to sale dated August 25, 2026; the document says the seller is not related to the promoters (DRHP p.114). The company had 24 employees at March 2026 (DRHP p.114).

Into the business: all of the proceeds, as this is a fresh issue only (DRHP p.1). To selling shareholders: nothing; the offer for sale is nil (DRHP p.1).

The issue amount is not stated in the draft, so the share of each object in the fresh issue cannot yet be worked out. General corporate purposes are capped at 15% of gross proceeds or ₹1,000 lakh, whichever is lower (DRHP p.113).

09Who is selling

Nobody. The issue is up to 33,74,000 new shares with no offer for sale (DRHP p.1). The promoters' average cost of acquisition is ₹0.35 a share, after the two bonus issues (DRHP p.61).

10Promoters

The promoters are Amol Gajanan Nale, Chandasudha Goswami, Sonawane Vinod Uttam and Shekhar Shivaji Nale (DRHP p.1). The document states that Amol Gajanan Nale and Chandasudha Goswami are spouses (DRHP p.238).

• Amol Gajanan Nale, 38, Chairman, Managing Director and CEO, with the company since incorporation; previously the proprietor of M/s MARCO (DRHP p.236, DRHP p.254).
• Chandasudha Goswami, 38, Whole-Time Director and Chief Operations Officer, with the company since incorporation (DRHP p.236, DRHP p.255).
• Sonawane Vinod Uttam, 42, Executive Director, with the company since incorporation (DRHP p.237, DRHP p.255).
• Shekhar Shivaji Nale, 33, Non-Executive Director since November 23, 2023; previously proprietor of M/s. Readymake Services (DRHP p.237, DRHP p.255).

Pay: FY26 remuneration was ₹19.00 lakh, ₹12.50 lakh, ₹10.55 lakh and ₹8.40 lakh respectively (DRHP p.241). Directors' remuneration was ₹45.94 lakh in FY24, ₹48.40 lakh in FY25 and ₹50.45 lakh in FY26, with ₹35.00 lakh of incentives on top in FY25 (DRHP p.329, DRHP p.326). The managing director's terms add a commission of 1% of net profit (DRHP p.239).

Competing businesses: Amol Gajanan Nale's proprietorship MARCO and promoter group member Sharada Vinod Sonawane's proprietorship Visha IT Solutions work in the same or similar line; both signed non-compete agreements on June 5, 2026 (DRHP p.46, DRHP p.230).

Litigation and pledges: no cases against the promoters (DRHP p.340, DRHP p.341) and no pledged shares (DRHP p.101). The promoters have not promoted any listed company, per the pages read.

Share economics: the founders subscribed 10,000 shares at ₹10 at incorporation, and 2,40,000 shares came from converting a loan into equity at ₹10 on May 20, 2023 (DRHP p.99). Two bonus issues followed: 18 for 1 on December 27, 2025 and 1 for 2 on July 13, 2026 (DRHP p.100). On September 8, 2025 three promoters each transferred 29 shares to a promoter group member at ₹0.34 a share, bonus adjusted (DRHP p.130).

11Who already owns it

Source: DRHP p.103.

There are seven shareholders and no outside investor (DRHP p.226). If all 33,74,000 new shares are issued, the total becomes 1,04,99,003 shares and the promoters' 71,24,916 shares become 67.9% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.98, DRHP p.103).

12What changed just before the IPO

• Revenue step-up: 341.79% growth in FY25, then 23.73% in FY26 (DRHP p.28).
• Margin: EBITDA margin from 6.00% in FY24 to 33.50% in FY26 (DRHP p.127).
• Subsidiary: Marco AIoT Technologies Private Limited formed April 4, 2025; the company holds 51%, Vikas Nale 30%, Chandasudha Goswami 14% and Umesh Vilasrao Desai 5% (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.233). FY26 subsidiary revenue was ₹13.84 lakh (DRHP p.233).
• Auditor: K B B & Associates resigned on May 2, 2025; R G G R & Associates LLP was appointed on May 13, 2025 (DRHP p.90).
• Public company: converted from private on October 7, 2025 (DRHP p.2).
• Bonus issues: 18 for 1 in December 2025 and 1 for 2 in July 2026 (DRHP p.99).
• Board: three independent directors joined in January and July 2026 (DRHP p.237).
• Debt: bank overdrafts closed in FY26 (DRHP p.327).
• Regulatory: penalties of ₹5.03 lakh were imposed and paid for historical company-law filings; an adjudication on Form SH-7 is pending (DRHP p.55).

13Capacity and expansion

Not applicable. The company has no plant or machinery and no installed capacity (DRHP p.205). The issue funds working capital and an office, not capacity (DRHP p.112). The order book was about ₹6,000 lakh at August 31, 2026 (DRHP p.115), which the document says is not a firm indicator of future revenue (DRHP p.28).

14Market size and industry structure

As claimed: the Infomerics Analytics & Research report dated July 29, 2026, commissioned and paid for by the company, puts the Indian MEP market at USD 9.91 billion in 2026 (DRHP p.156), the Indian fire safety market at USD 2.12 billion (DRHP p.159) and the Indian electronic security market at USD 3.23 billion (DRHP p.162). The part that is addressable: the company sells into all three, but 99.69% of its revenue is from Maharashtra (DRHP p.38). The report does not size the Maharashtra market in the pages read. What the company is today: FY26 revenue of ₹3,317.87 lakh against about ₹1,44,436 crore for the three markets combined at the March 2026 rate of ₹94.65 to the dollar, roughly 0.02% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.24, DRHP p.77). The segments may overlap.

The document describes competition from large integrated contractors, specialist MEP firms, regional EPC players and technology-led service providers (DRHP p.205). Projections in the report are Infomerics' and newboard has not tested them.

15Competitive position

Source: DRHP p.128, DRHP p.129.

What the document offers as reasons customers choose the company: work across the project lifecycle, several engineering systems under one contractor, a track record of over 200 projects, certifications and licences needed to bid for tenders, and promoter experience (DRHP p.195, DRHP p.196). Against that: 24 employees, one state, and a customer list that turns over (DRHP p.206, DRHP p.38, DRHP p.325).

16Peers the company named

Peers named in the offer document: Falcon Technoprojects India Limited and Telge Projects Limited (DRHP p.126).

Source: DRHP p.126. Peer P/E is at September 9, 2026 closing prices; the average of the two is 21.94 (DRHP p.125).

Both peers are larger by revenue, 1.7 and 1.2 times (our arithmetic, DRHP p.126), and both report lower margins and returns in FY26 (DRHP p.128, DRHP p.129). No P/E is possible for the company until a price band is set.

17Risks, in plain words

• Customers: the largest customer was 56.52% of FY25 revenue and 23.41% of FY26 (DRHP p.42). A lost customer is replaced only by new project wins, because contracts are not long term (DRHP p.319).
• Geography: 99.69% of FY26 revenue from Maharashtra (DRHP p.38); a slowdown in that state's building activity has no offset elsewhere in the record.
• Sector: real estate was 76.27% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.188).
• Suppliers: the largest supplier was 39.49% of FY26 purchases, up from 21.11% (DRHP p.43).
• Working capital: receivable days rose from 118 to 150 (DRHP p.31) and ₹297.25 lakh was over 180 days old at March 2026 (DRHP p.275).
• Promoters: two proprietorships of the promoter family work in the same line; FY25 purchases from MARCO were ₹168.83 lakh (DRHP p.46, DRHP p.57).
• Compliance: GST and ESI payments were paid late in FY23 to FY25, and ₹5.03 lakh of company-law penalties were paid (DRHP p.51, DRHP p.55).
• Issue: the promoters' cost is ₹0.35 a share (DRHP p.61); every issue in the past year was a bonus, at no price (DRHP p.62).

18Litigation and regulatory matters

The materiality threshold for civil cases is ₹22.14 lakh (DRHP p.338).

19Related-party transactions

Source: DRHP p.57, DRHP p.58.

Other items: director remuneration (section 09), a ₹10.00 lakh loan from Chandasudha Goswami in FY26, and ₹15.22 lakh lent to the subsidiary in FY26 (DRHP p.57, DRHP p.58). Transactions with Visha IT Solutions, Excellance Infotech and Readymake Services stopped after FY25, and purchases from MARCO fell to ₹6.65 lakh in FY26 (DRHP p.57). The non-compete agreements are dated June 5, 2026 (DRHP p.230).

20What the offer document does not say

• Customer names: none of the top ten customers is named (DRHP p.334).
• The order book by customer, sector or contract type: only a total of about ₹6,000 lakh (DRHP p.115).
• Why purchases fell to 59.97% of revenue beyond "improved procurement terms" and mix (DRHP p.329).
• Which figure for payable days is right: two tables give different numbers for the same years (DRHP p.31, DRHP p.116).
• What the ₹233.61 lakh investment in property is, in the pages read (DRHP p.275).
• Margins by segment or by contract type.
• The price band, lot size, issue size and dates, which is normal at DRHP stage.

21Five questions for management

1. What share of the FY26 fall in purchases, from 67.08% to 59.97% of revenue, came from item-rate contracts where the customer supplies materials?
2. How much of the ₹297.25 lakh of receivables older than 180 days at March 2026 has since been collected?
3. What is the ₹233.61 lakh investment in property, and how does it relate to the Baner office?
4. How much of the ₹6,000 lakh order book is from real estate customers in Maharashtra?
5. Which customers made up the FY26 top ten, and how many were billed in FY24 or FY25?

2Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 2 documents the company filed. The 119 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.