Dual Mandate Dilemma State-owned Enterprises (SOEs) operate at the intersection of public policy and commercial markets, tasked with delivering public goods while competing with private firms. This dual mandate often leads to internal inefficiencies, blurred performance metrics, and institutional confusion, particularly in sectors with mixed market structures. Sector-Specific Performance Patterns The analysis shows that SOEs in natural monopolies (e.g., electricity, logistics) have legitimate structural advantages and positive economic multipliers. In contrast, SOEs in competitive sectors like manufacturing or finance often underperform due to weak incentives, crowding-out effects, and soft budget constraints. Institutional Quality Determines Outcomes SOES contributions to economic growth are conditional on strong governance frameworks. Cross-country evidence from the OECD and World Bank confirms that countries with centralized ownership policies, clear mandates, and separation of roles (owner vs. regulator) demonstrate better SOEs performance and fiscal accountability. Macroeconomic Sensitivity and Sectoral Stress Regression-based stress testing reveals that SOEs profitability is highly sensitive to macroeconomic shocks. The financial and banking sectors exhibit the highest vulnerability to variables such as GDP growth, interest rates, inflation, and government bond yields, indicating systemic risk exposure. Reform Must Be Differentiated and Strategic Using Modified BCG Matrix, Financial Ratio Matrix, and Sectoral Multiplier Matrix analyses, SOEs are mapped into strategic quadrants that reflect their growth potential, efficiency, liquidity, and strategic values toward the society. The findings argue against blanket privatization or support policies, calling instead for selective restructuring, performance-based incentives, and differentiated capital treatment.