Why do you keep falling without new news?
The last relevant publication of the fund was on 09/06, the payment of the partial dividend of R$ 0,23 per unit. Since then, silence: zero relevant facts in 15 days. Still, the unit came out from R$ 27,90 (02/06) to R$ 22,75 today, playing the minimum historical R$ 20,82 in 10/06. Whoever expects "no bad news" to mean stabilization is reading the wrong asset. There are four sales pressure mechanisms operating regardless of any communication.
First, the uncertainty about the guarantees. Since organized units filed complaints in MPF, Federal Police, BACEN, CVM, B3 and BSM on 27/05, the claim that CRI Santo André describes a project that was never filed in the city of Santa Cruz Cabrália, with construction license expired in April/2025, has been circulated. As long as this is not clear, each unit holder who does not accept the risk of total loss sells — and that exit does not need a daily trigger.
Second, the end of the rent. The CACR11 was purchased by those who wanted the monthly drip of CRI high yetd. With the suspension of April dividends (R$ 1,24/unit withheld) on 03/05 and only a partial payment in 2026, the reinvestment of proceeds stopped. Whoever depended on the rent has no reason to hold the unit.
Third, the contagion effect of the sector. The high-yield paper FII model linked to residential incorporation lost credibility in 2026. The same unit holders you saw. HCTR11 bleeding and URPR11 Turn fraction of the VP apply the same mistrust discount to the CACR11 — and TORD11, who has become pennies, is the ghost that surrounds the whole category.
Fourth, the forced institutional sale. Investment funds that carry shares of CACR11 have internal rules of exposure to stressed assets. When a CRI goes into formal default, such as Helvetia on 22/05, some are forced to reduce position regardless of price — and seller flow that ignores price drops an illiquid unit without needing headline.
The market here is not wrong or in irrational panic. It's pricing an asset whose real value no one can claim.
What's in fact still at risk?
The declared equity of R$ 464,4 millions is 100% allocated to CRIs under default or renegotiation. The VP of R$ 96,03 per unit is only valid if these guarantees exist and are enforceable. See the real situation of each exhibition:
| CRI | % of PL | Real situation |
|---|---|---|
| CRI Santo André (Baiano) | 25,1% | Binary risk. Cotistas claim that the project was never filed at the city hall and that the license expired in April/2025. If the claim proceeds, the guarantee is ghost and recovery tends to zero. If the fund manager proves otherwise, it is the largest possible unlocking. |
| CRI Amalfi / Viva (Itaparica) | 21,3% | Work on 5,7%, 114 reserves, exchange of incorporation in the middle of the work. Risk of prolonged delay: guarantee exists, but liquidation depends on resuming a practically stopped work. |
| CRI Helvetia (Indaiatuba/SP) | 12,7% | In DEFAULT since 22/05. Execution of guarantees in progress — 22 high standard homes. Realistic recovery from 12 to 36 months, subject to the discount of the judicial sale. |
| CRI Savoie (Salvador) | 11,9% | Modifying project in progress, third Bahian CRI of the portfolio. Same pattern of work stuck and change of incorporation. |
| Real Park (SP) | ~10% | Work in 11%, awaiting Registration of Incorporation. In the early stages — exposed to the risk of execution, not fraud. |
| Station Vila Madalena (SP) | 3,6% | Only positive. DISCLOSED — Get used to 27/04/2026 with amortization in progress. Proof that part of the wallet actually generates cash. |
The pattern is evident: the three Bahian CRIs add up 58,3% from the PL and share the same structural defect — exchange of embodyer in the middle of the work, jammed works and, in the case of the Saint Andrew, the most serious suspicion of all. Helvetia is already in real execution. Station shows the model can work. But the Bahian concentration is what defines the risk: if the guarantees from there are illiquid or non-existent, the VP of R$ 96 becomes accounting fiction.
Fair price range: what do the numbers say
The VP of R$ 96,03 is the official reference, but it needs to be treated as an optimistic ceiling — not as an anchor. If Saint Andrew's guarantees are partly fictitious, the real patrimony is a fraction of that. Honest analysis works with three recovery scenarios on the declared PV:
| Scene | Premise | Fair price |
|---|---|---|
| Pessimistic | Saint Andrew's guarantee is a ghost and Helvetia loses value in execution. Recovery of 10-15% from VP. | R$ 8 – 15 |
| Base | Guarantees exist but are illiquid; execution within 24-36 months recovers ~30-45% from VP. | R$ 20 – 30 |
| Optimist | Baian launches unlock and the DPS returns in 12 months; P/VP recovers to ~0,50. | R$ 40 – 55 |
The current R$ 22,75 quotation is within the base scenario. In other words: Today’s price no longer boosts panic — trigger a partial recovery. There's not the glaring security margin that some imagine when they see "0,24 P/VP." The discount of 76% on VP is misleading because the denominator (VP) is precisely what is under question.
Comparison with peer enhances reading. In the crisis, the HCTR11 parked in 35-50% of the VP, because its guarantees, although stressed, were mostly real. The URPR11 came to negotiate between 10-30% of the VP, in a case of more acute distrust. CACR11 to R$ 22,75 negotiates the ~24% of the VP — closer to the URPR11 floor than the HCTR11. The market is already treating it as the worst case in the category, not the best.
Verdict: SELL (note 1,0/10). The R$ 22,75 the CACR11 is not "high" — it is priced for the base scenario of partial recovery through the execution of guarantees within 24-36 months. The real risk is no longer falling 30%; it is the pessimistic scenario, in which the claim about Santo André is confirmed and the fair price collapses to R$ 8-15. The asymmetry is against the buyer: the positive side (R$ 40-55) depends on unlocking stop Bahian works, while the negative side is almost total loss. For the investor of income or equity, there is no thesis. For the speculator, it's a binary bet, not an FII.
What do I do now?
The answer depends entirely on your profile — and none of the options are comfortable.
Conservative or income investor: Get out. The fund does not distribute repeatedly, the PV is uncertain and the outcome depends on lawsuits and investigations that can take years. Loading CACR11 waiting to "recover the average price" is confusing hope with thesis. The damage is already in the statement; the question is whether you want to keep capital trapped in an asset that may still lose most of what is left.
Speculator with clear thesis: the only justification to buy or maintain is to explicitly bet on the base-to-optimist scenario — real guarantees, successful execution of Helvetia, proof that the Saint Andrew is legitimate. But that only makes sense with capital that you accept to see zero, and in a small position. To make an average price here is to double the bet on a binary risk asset without new information that changes the probability. Anyone who can't look at the position and say "I agree to lose 100% of this" shouldn't be bought.
There is no comfortable third way to "hold on and see what happens." Holding is an active decision to maintain exposure to an asset with an almost total loss risk verdict.
