At first glance, a stock that has already surged more than 250% in a year should be running out of fuel. Yet analysts at Needham argue the opposite. By initiating coverage with a Buy rating and a $357 price target, they are effectively stating that the market is still underestimating the company’s long-term strategic value. The rally so far reflects excitement — but not full recognition of the role this business is positioned to play in reshaping the U.S. nuclear fuel supply chain.

What makes the story compelling is not uranium prices alone, but positioning. The company has transitioned from a niche supplier into a critical domestic producer of next-generation nuclear fuel, backed by regulatory approval no competitor currently holds. As the U.S. accelerates its push for energy independence and advanced reactors move closer to commercialization, this firm sits at the intersection of policy, security, and technology. In such environments, valuation resets are not gradual — they are structural.

Top Points

For an investor, it's helpful to frame the story with a few key facts that explain why this company is getting the spotlight:

• YTD shares +259%, but Needham still sees more potential
• HALEU's only licensed producer in the U.S.
• record SWU prices → rising margins
• $3.9 billion backlog providing revenue visibility for years to come
• USD 1.6 billion cash → balance sheet safer than most industrial companies
• geopolitics and federal legislation clearly support domestic enrichment capacity

Company profile: transformation from a retailer to a strategic industrial pillar

Centrus Energy $LEU was created as a commercial intermediate in the nuclear fuel chain whose role has long been relatively simple: to secure the supply of low-enriched uranium. This business model was profitable, but there were no long-term competitive barriers, and the company was therefore not seen as strategic by investors. In recent years, however, the situation has changed dramatically. Centrus has invested in its own enrichment technology, obtained a full NRC license - an extremely difficult and time-consuming process - and was the first in the US to commission capacity capable of producing HALEU.

This is what moved the company from the periphery to the very heart of US energy policy. HALEU fuel production requires not only technological infrastructure, but also safety standards that are among the most stringent in the entire energy sector. Thus, competition will not emerge in months or years; rather, it is a barrier to entry that can be measured in decades. The company is now conceived of as a US industrial and national asset - much like LNG exporters a decade ago or semiconductor manufacturers after 2020.

Another aspect that is fundamentally changing the company's profile is the approach of the government and the Department of Energy. Nuclear fuel is no longer a purely commercial commodity. It is a matter of strategic security, geopolitics and military self-sufficiency. And Centrus is the first link in this infrastructure on which to build an entire renaissance of domestic nuclear capability.

Where business can grow fastest: structural drivers for the next decade

There are several opportunities, but three of them are fundamental and will determine the company's growth well into its 30s.

1. HALEU as the fuel of the future

Most modular reactors (TerraPower, X-Energy, NuScale) are designed specifically for HALEU. Without it, SMR construction will not take off. Companies that want to be the first producers of the next generation of reactors need a steady supply of HALEU - and Centrus is the only supplier in the US that can provide it. The market could grow by hundreds of percent in 10 years.

2. Russia's exit from the global enrichment market

Russia held between 35 and 40% of the world's enrichment capacity. After the sanctions, there is a huge deficit that the Western world needs to fill quickly. SWU prices have therefore soared to record highs and analysts expect them to remain high for many years. Companies with their own enrichment capacity - which in the US is virtually only Centrus - have unique pricing power.

3. Federal contracts and military programs

The Department of Energy is developing a long-term fuel cycle renewal program. The U.S. military is testing SMRs for bases, logistics centers, and remote operating areas. All of these programs need fuel in a mode that is safe, domestic, and geopolitically independent.

Analyzing the SMR market - why Centrus is at the center of the nuclear renaissance

The small modular reactor (SMR) market has transformed from a rapidly emerging segment into a strategic priority for the US, the EU and energy companies around the world. SMRs are not just a technological innovation - they are the answer to the problems of large nuclear units: long construction times, high costs, complex regulatory processes and political uncertainty. The US sees SMRs as one of the key pillars of the future energy sector, mainly because of the decarbonisation of the industry, the stabilisation of the energy grid and the need to strengthen energy security.

What is critical for investors?

Most SMRs use HALEU (High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium)which is a fuel enriched to 5-20%. And this is where a unique market asymmetry arises: the US HALEU does not produce, Russia (TENEX) is virtually the only global source, and imports from politically risky countries are restricted by US legislation. This creates an environment where the domestic producer - Centrus - is at the centre of the whole industry.

Specific SMR projects that HALEU needs:

• TerraPower Natrium, funded in part by the federal government
• X-Energy Xe-100one of the leaders in high-temperature reactors
• Ultra Safe Nuclear Micro-Modular Reactorsuitable for remote locations
• BWXT micro-reactors, defence and space projects in collaboration with NASA
• Holtec SMR-300, where DOE also expects demand for HALEU

The implication for Centrus is clear: any real SMR rollout means a leap in demand for HALEU, and there is no other capacity in the US that can meet this demand in the short term.

Comparison with competitors: who can realistically enter the market and why Centrus' moat is extremely strong

Centrus has several layers of competition that together create an unusually strong barrier to entry in the enrichment segment. Indeed, competition in the nuclear fuel cycle is not unlike consumer goods - it is a field with strong regulation, a high capital threshold, and technologies that few countries control.

Real Alternatives Today:

Europe - Urenco

A European consortium is producing enriched uranium, however:

• its capacity is long booked.
• politically, it primarily supplies the EU
• does not have a licence for HALEU production in the US

France - Orano - Technically capable player but constrained by European politics and capacity.

Canada - Considering entering the HALEU segment but is in the study phase.

China - Has its own production but cannot export HALEUs to the US market for geopolitical reasons.

Russia - TENEX - Historically the dominant producer of HALEU. However, the U.S. is gradually reducing imports, which directly strengthens Centrus.

Result:

Centrus is the sole holder of NRC license. in the U.S. and the only one with a working production line. In addition to its technological edge, it has a regulatory advantage - it takes time to obtain a permit in the U.S. yearsif it even passes politically. This creates a moat that is quite unique in the nuclear industry.

Timeline of key events

The last ten years represent a dramatic transformation of the company. Here is a comprehensive overview:

2014-2018: reorganisation and stabilisation

• The company exits the Russian material-dependent model.
• Restructuring and preparation for in-house AC-100M centrifuge technology is underway.

2019-2021: Licensing milestones and first government contracts

• Acquisition of key NRC licenses for enrichment in the US.
• Award of pilot contract with DOE for HALEU test production.

2022: Geopolitical turning point - Russian invasion of Ukraine.

• US begins planning for complete removal of Russian nuclear material.
• DOE launches HALEU Availability Program.
• Centrus is identified as the only domestic manufacturer.

2023: Completion of the HALEU demonstration line.

• First U.S. production of HALEU in more than 70 years.
• Additional federal contracts awarded.

2024: Backlog grows to $3.9 billion.

• Company transforms into a strategic manufacturing company.
• DOE increases projected future delivery volumes.

2025: Uplisting to NYSE and massive growth in the stock.

• Entry among the big stock market players.
• Stock appreciates by more than 300% as the market appreciates structural demand.
• Needham, UBS and Evercore raise targets, SMR projects close to implementation.

Management - why leadership is one of the company's greatest assets

Nuclear is not a sector where just anyone can succeed. Dealing with regulation, safety standards and government contracts requires experience that most companies in the market don't have. Management Centrus is exceptional in this regard.

Daniel Poneman (CEO)

• Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy.
• Long career in nuclear policy, security and international energy.
• Considered one of the most competent leaders in the civil nuclear cycle.

His contacts in DOE, NRC and the defense sector have been instrumental in the company's a strategic advantage for the company.that is difficult to measure in financial statements, but significantly affects the ability to win contracts.

Natalia Shakhlevich (Chief Nuclear Officer)

• Expert in enrichment technologies and operation of HALEU lines.
• Participated in certification processes and technical audits with NRC.

Daniel Beck (CFO)

• Focuses on maintaining high liquidity and contract management with DOE.
• Instrumental in strengthening cash position to $1.6 billion.

Management combines experience in government, nuclear infrastructure, and strategic management. For an investor, this is critical - in the nuclear sector, decisions are often made the competence of the team more than the product itself.

Financial performance: capital cycle on the rise

Revenues - fastest growth in the company's history, but with a very different structure

Revenues grew from USD 298 million in 2021 At USD 442 million in 2024, representing 47% growth over three years. However, it is not only the pace but also the nature of the growth that matters:

• 2024: +38% yoy - the strongest dynamics of the decade
• 2023: +9% yoy - stabilisation year
• 2022: slight decline -1.5%, due to cyclical supply and timing of contracts

Structure of growth is key: revenues now more than ever reflect the mix of enrichment production, DOE contracts and SWU prices, not just brokerage. This increases revenue visibility into future years.

Gross profit - stagnation points to a transition phase

While revenues are skyrocketing, gross profit is in between ~$112-118 million for the last four years, even dropping slightly in 2024 to USD 111.5 million.

What does this mean?

• Growth has not yet been generated by higher margins
• the company is still in a period of calibrating the costs associated with HALEU production
• the benefits of production will only become apparent once full capacity is up and running

So margins aren't growing now - but growth may be yet to come, which is why analysts have such aggressive price targets on the stock.

Operating profit - a gradual decline that may herald a turnaround

Operating profit declined from US$68.3 million (2021) to USD 48 million (2024).
The market would view this dynamic as a cautionary tale for a cyclical company, but in the context of Centrus it is investment stage:

• HALEU capacity preparation costs have risen significantly
• the company was increasing employment in the nuclear segment
• fixed costs were growing faster than sales

If Needham and the DOE are right with their estimate of HALEU demand, this curve will turn up in the next few years. And dramatically so.

Net income - extreme volatility reflects one-time tax items

The firm's net profit is the most distorted in the time series:

• 2021: 175 million. USD 1.5 billion (driven by one-time tax item and reverse adjustments)
• 2022: 52.2 million. USD
• 2023: 84.4 million. USD
• 2024: 73.2 million. USD

On the face of it, this is a -13% decline in 2024, but the reality is different:

• Revenue grows +38%.
• Margins improve
• the decline is mainly due to an extremely low tax provision in 2023which has normalised this year

Important: Profitability is stable, not decliningwhen one-off items are removed.

Valuation: expensive company or unique monopoly?

At first glance, valuation may appear aggressive. P/E over 34, P/S over 6 and P/B over 12 are not standard values for an energy company. However, Centrus is no longer a traditional energy company - it is a unique producer in a sector where there is virtually no substitution or competition.

Therefore, analysts value the stock at a different multiple than an investor would expect for a commodity player. Needham uses a multiple of 45× 2027 EPS, Evercore targets up to $390, UBS sees potential of $245, and Daiwa (the most conservative) still holds a Buy rating. The common denominator is the belief that the company is entering the most significant growth cycle in its history.

The high multiples thus reflect not current performance, but positioning in a value chain that is now being created virtually from scratch.

Analysts' expectations

The highest growth potential attributed by analysts to Centrus Energy today comes from the investment bank Evercore ISI. The latter, after updating its models, has set a target price USD 390which, at the current price of around $278, implies a roughly +40% upside. Meanwhile, Evercore is one of the most respected analyst houses in the energy sector and its reasoning is based on the long-term shortage of enrichment capacity in the US, the growing demand for SWU and the key role that Centrus plays in the production of HALEU fuel for new reactor types. According to Evercore, the company is the only commercial player that can realistically meet US demand, giving it a competitive advantage with extraordinary pricing power for years to come.

Other analysts add additional layers of argument, but it is Evercore that has the most ambitious model based on the assumption that Centrus will become the central supplier for the U.S. nuclear program. Needham sees room for growth of around 25-30%, UBS sees the potential more modest but positive, while Evercore is working with full monetization of HALEU capacity and structural changes in the US fuel-cycle. This explains why their target price is significantly higher than their competitors - they view Centrus not as a fuel broker, but as a future monopoly infrastructure critical to US energy security.

Investment scenarios

Optimistic scenario - US accelerates nuclear renaissance

If the government's SMR programs get off the ground faster than currently anticipated, Centrus will be a major supplier of fuel for the first generation of modular reactors. DOE is allocating more contracts, HALEU lines are transitioning to full commercial operation, and SWU prices remain high due to global shortages. As a result, the company is entering a period of double-digit revenue and profit growth, while investors appreciate the stability of earnings. In this scenario, the stock may trade above USD 360-420.

Realistic scenario - gradual growth based on contract visibility

The most likely scenario is that DOE will release contracts gradually, SMR projects will move forward but without dramatic acceleration. The company increases HALEU capacity, revenues grow at a moderate pace, cash flow is strong, margins stabilize. The stock finds an equilibrium range of around $260-330, with investors valuing in particular the secure balance sheet and strategic positioning.

Pessimistic scenario - administrative delays and slow SMR take-up

If some SMR programs are delayed or DOE delays the allocation of some contracts, Centrus' growth will slow down. Revenues stagnate, earnings fluctuate with the project cycle, and valuation normalizes at $180-220. However, the company remains a strategic enterprise with a strong cash pile and virtually zero existential risk.

What to take away from the article

• The firm is at the center of the U.S. effort to reset the nuclear fuel cycle - a structural, not cyclical, trend.
• As HALEU's only U.S. producer Centrus has a strategic position that cannot be quickly replaced, either technologically or regulatorily.
• It has USD 3.9 billion backlogwhich provides revenue visibility for years to come.
• USD 1.6 billion of cash.
• Record SWU prices represent a strong driver for margin growth in the years ahead.
• Needham, Evercore, UBS and Daiwa all rate the stock positively due to DOE's long-term priorities and the renaissance of SMR programs.
• The key risk is not fundamentals, but the timing of government contracts and the market's high expectations for rapid growth in the stock.
• The company's profile is shifting from trader to strategic industrial pillar - which fundamentally changes its valuation.
• The investment is asymmetric: the structural room for growth is significant while the existential risks are low.

Recent U.S. labor data have shaken investor confidence, with unemployment filings climbing just as major indices flirt with record highs. As market participants debate whether this reflects a genuine cooling of economic momentum or a short-lived fluctuation, the implications for Fed policy and equity valuations hang in the balance. This report dissects what the latest figures could mean for stocks, interest rates, and broader economic trends.

U.S. unemployment claims from 2023

Yesterday's release of data on new unemployment claims in the United States was a reminder once again of how sensitive financial markets are to even seemingly minor changes in macroeconomic indicators when they take place in an environment where equity indices are near all-time highs.

Initial jobless claims have long been one of the most closely watched short-term labour market indicators, as they provide an almost immediate view of whether firms are starting to lay off or whether they are still maintaining high demand for labour. According to data from the U.S. Department of Labor new claims rose to 236,000, a significant week-on-week increase and above market expectations. Nevertheless, this is still a level that is rather low in a historical context and does not in itself indicate the arrival of a recession.

It is this discrepancy between the short-term surprise and the longer-term context that is key to understanding why markets have reacted rather optimistically even though it may seem strange at first glance.

However, in addition to the number of new claims for unemployment benefits, it is also necessary to look at the number of continuing claims, i.e. the number of people receiving unemployment benefits repeatedly. While initial claims capture the immediate shock of new layoffs, continuing claims provide a deeper insight into whether people are able to return to the labour force relatively quickly or whether they remain unemployed for a longer period of time. It is the rise in continuing claims that is considered a much more dangerous signal than a one-off increase in new claims, as it indicates more structural problems in the labour market. According to analyses by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, continuing claims have historically had a stronger correlation with recessions than initial claims alone, especially if their growth persists for several months in a row.

United States Continuing Jobless Claims (1W chart) by 2023

Economists agree that jobless claims are among the so-called leading indicators, that is, indicators that tend to change direction before the changes are fully reflected in the real economy. This view is confirmed, for example, by the work of published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, which analyses the relationship between jobless claims and business cycles and shows that a persistent rise in jobless claims often precedes a slowdown in economic activity, but not necessarily every short-term spike. It is the word persistent that is key in this context, as historical data show that one-off jumps in weekly numbers can be caused by seasonal factors, administrative changes or temporary disruptions in certain sectors of the economy.

Economists therefore often use a four-week moving average to eliminate short-term noise. In the current case, this average has risen only slightly, suggesting that it is not yet a clear signal of structural deterioration in the labour market. This approach is supported by academic studies such as a paper published in the Journal of Economic Dynamics and Controlwhich shows that a combination of several indicators is important for identifying economic breaks.

Market reaction

The reaction of financial markets to yesterday's data was relatively subdued, reflecting the fact that investors have been anticipating a gradual cooling of the US labour market for some time. The S&P 500 index was slightly in the red in the first minutes after the data was released, but there was no sharp sell-off. However, the index managed to end yesterday's day with a gain of around a quarter of a percent, despite being down 0.8% in premarket trading in the morning. This development is all the more interesting as US stocks are currently just below their all-time highs. This means that the market is theoretically more vulnerable to negative surprises as valuations are elevated and investor expectations are relatively optimistic. Still, investors appeared to see the current data as confirmation of a gradual slowdown rather than a warning of a sudden downturn.

One reason why markets have not reacted significantly negatively is the interpretation of this data in relation to monetary policy. Weaker labour market data may increase the likelihood that the Fed will continue to ease monetary conditions in the coming months. This mechanism is well described in a number of studies on the monetary policy transmission mechanism, for example in the Bank for International Settlementswhich explains how rate expectations affect financial asset prices before the central bank actually acts.

From a macroeconomic point of view, the labour market in the US is crucial, as household consumption accounts for around two-thirds of US GDP. High employment and wage growth have been a key factor in recent years, allowing the economy to grow even in an environment of higher interest rates. However, if the labour market were to begin to deteriorate more sharply, this would be reflected relatively quickly in consumer spending and subsequently in corporate profits. This relationship is confirmed by study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, which analyses the link between unemployment, consumption and economic growth.

It is important for investors to note that the current labor market situation is different from typical recession scenarios of the past. Although the unemployment rate has risen slightly in recent months, it is still at relatively low levels. At the same time, job openings remain high, suggesting that demand for labour has not completely disappeared, but rather is normalising after an extremely tight post-pandemic period.

The proximity to all-time highs on the S&P 500 adds another dimension to the situation. Historically, it has often been the case that markets have reached new highs just as macroeconomic indicators were beginning to deteriorate. This paradox is explained by the fact that financial markets discount the future and often react to expected central bank actions before the economic slowdown is fully manifested. Academic literature describes this phenomenon as "bad news is good news", a situation where weaker macro data leads to higher equity prices due to expectations of monetary easing.

Chart of the S&P 500 Index (Wednesday 20:00 - Friday 10:00) 1H

Impact on the economy

Another important aspect is the impact of the labour market on corporate performance and management outlook. Rising unemployment may reduce upward pressure on wages in the short term, helping firms stabilize margins, especially in an environment of slowing inflation. In the longer term, however, a weaker labour market implies lower consumer demand, which may negatively affect firms' earnings across the economy. Investors should therefore monitor not only the macro data itself, but also how companies react to it in their earnings conferences, particularly in the form of changes to the outlook for the next quarter.

From a retail investor perspective, it is therefore crucial to understand that yesterday's rise in unemployment claims is not an isolated signal, but part of a broader macroeconomic story. The labour market is gradually cooling, which may increase volatility in the short term, but it may also create an environment conducive to lower interest rates and continued support for equity valuations. The key will be whether the surge in jobless claims proves to be a one-off or whether it is confirmed by other data in the coming weeks and months.

Conclusion

At the current stage, the economy is on the edge between a soft landing scenario and a harder slowdown. If the rise in unemployment claims proves temporary and the labour market remains relatively resilient, the US economy may go through a period of mild slowdown without a significant rise in unemployment, which would be a positive outcome for equity markets. Conversely, a sustained rise in jobless claims, accompanied by a worsening corporate outlook and a decline in consumer confidence, could increase the risk of a deeper market correction. This is why the coming weeks and months will be crucial to confirm whether yesterday's data will be a footnote or the start of a more significant macroeconomic trend.

Nubank’s third quarter of 2025 marks another decisive step in its transformation from a disruptive fintech into one of the world’s most efficient and scalable digital banking platforms. With its customer base surpassing 127 million users and growth accelerating in all core regions, the company has firmly established itself as Brazil’s financial default. Engagement remains exceptionally high, monetization is improving, and the expansion in Mexico and Colombia is gaining the kind of traction that signals long-term structural growth. Revenue reached a record $4.2 billion, net income surged to $783 million, and ROE climbed to an impressive 31%, underscoring a business model operating at remarkable scale and profitability.

What makes this quarter particularly significant is the deepening of Nubank’s technology advantage. Operating costs per customer remain under $1, while ARPAC has risen above $13, highlighting a monetization engine that becomes stronger as the platform grows. The company is now accelerating its shift toward an AI-first architecture designed to automate processes, enhance risk evaluation, and personalize financial services at a scale unmatched by traditional banks. Q3 2025 confirms that Nubank is not only dominating Latin America’s fintech landscape but is also emerging as a global blueprint for the next generation of digital banking.

How was the last quarter?

The third quarter of 2025 was clearly the best everfor $NU. Revenues grew 39% year-on-year to $4.2 billion (FX-neutral), reflecting rapid growth in the client base, higher user activity and acceleration in monetisation. Key metrics show that Nu is able to combine expansion with increasing efficiency - the efficiency ratio fell to 27.7%, an exceptionally low level in the context of the fintech sector and traditional banking. Net profit reached $783m, up 39% FX-neutral year-on-year, and return on equity rose to 31%, a level that ranks among the absolute top in the banking sector.

The credit business, which is an increasingly important pillar of growth alongside payments, also showed significant improvement, with a loan portfolio of $30.4 billion, up 42% year-on-year (FX-neutral), and presenting a diversified structure: credit cards grew at a double-digit rate and secured loans added a strong 133%, while unsecured loans grew 63%. At the same time, portfolio quality remains under control, with the 15-90 day NPL in Brazil at 4.2% and the 90+ NPL only slightly up at 6.8%, in line with expected seasonality and market dynamics.

From a funding perspective, Nu has once again confirmed that it can attract cheap deposits in large volumes. Deposits grew 34% year-on-year (FXN) to $38.8 billion and funding costs represent only 89% of the interbank rate. The loan-to-deposit ratio is 46%, a comfortable level allowing for further credit expansion without pressure on more expensive funding sources. Interest-Earning Portfolio also grew significantly, increasing 54% to $17.7 billion, demonstrating that Nu is increasingly moving towards a universal digital bank model with a strong yield profile.

Client activity remains extremely robust: 106 million active users at 83% activity shows extremely high user retention. Payment volumes reached $36.5 billion, up 20% from a year ago. ARPAC has risen to $13.4 from $11 a year ago, while cost of service is holding at $0.9 - this combination represents one of Nu's largest competitive differentiators globally. As a result, the firm is able to monetize users many times more efficiently than most global fintechs, while maintaining a lower cost burden than traditional banks.

Overall, Nu demonstrated a unique combination in Q3 2025: the fastest growth in the region's client base, record user monetization, strong portfolio quality, and sharp profitability growth. This quarter confirms that Nu's model is not only scalable but also highly profitable.

• Full presentation with results.

CEO commentary

David Vélez highlighted that Q3 2025 is a symbol for Nu that the company can "grow and mature". According to him, Nu is entering a new phase where it is no longer just a hyper-expansive fintech startup, but a technology-driven financial institution that combines massive customer growth with increasing profitability. Vélez underlined that the company is working on an AI-first transformation, aiming to build an interface where banking interactions become more automated and personalised the more users use the platform. AI is set to fundamentally impact risk-modeling, customer support, product recommendation and operations.

The CEO also highlighted that the growth in Mexico and Colombia confirms the scalability of the model outside Brazil. Mexico already serves 14% of the adult population and Colombia is approaching 4 million clients. According to Vélez, it is the ability to replicate geographically that is one of the company's greatest assets. Thus, he says the results show not just short-term growth, but a structural shift by the company towards being Latin America's dominant digital banking player.

Outlook

Nu enters the next quarters with extremely strong momentum and some clear priorities. The firm expects continued client growth across all markets, with Brazil already focused more on monetisation than on expanding the customer base itself. Management expects ARPAC to continue to grow through cross-selling, expansion of credit products and investment services. From a portfolio perspective, the goal is to maintain high growth while managing risk, particularly in the phase of expanding unsecured lending outside of Brazil.

Nu is also investing heavily in architecture based on foundation models. This transformation is expected to lead to further reductions in customer servicing costs, faster onboarding processes and more efficient risk-scoring. The firm also plans to leverage its strong deposit base to further grow its loan book, with an LDR of 46% giving significant room for expansion. The trend that analysts expect is steady profitability growth and further improvement in ROE, which should continue to remain well above the sector average.

Long-term results

Nu's long-term development confirms that the company is one of the fastest growing financial institutions in the world. Revenues for 2024 are up 45% to $11.1 billion, following previous growth of 70% and nearly 200% in 2022 and 2021, respectively. This trajectory points to exponential expansion not only in absolute client numbers but also in monetization, driven by loan products, higher transaction activity and growth in investment services.

Gross profit for 2024 is up 52%, operating profit is up 82% to $2.8 billion, and net income has nearly doubled to $1.97 billion. Particularly significant is the turnaround from 2022, when the company was still in the red - since then, Nu has transformed into a steadily profitable company with soaring earnings per share. EPS for 2024 was $0.41, nearly double 2023's, while EBITDA was $2.87 billion. The number of shares outstanding is growing only marginally, supporting earnings per share growth.

Over the long term, this is a story of a fintech that has not only grown rapidly, but more importantly, has successfully transitioned into a highly scalable and profitable bank whose key metrics - revenue, profitability, margins and return on capital - are growing in parallel.

News

The most notable news of the quarter is the progressive transformation of Nu into an AI-first banking platform, which is set to fundamentally change the way the company delivers services and manages its own operations. In particular, the integration of foundation models relates to risk management, predictive analysis of client behaviour and customer care automation. The firm is also strengthening its presence in Mexico and Colombia, where it sees huge scope for growth in financial services penetration.

Nu is also expanding its investment products, insurance, payment services and secured lending, which are gaining traction quickly due to its easy onboarding process. The rapid growth in deposits is also significant news, which increases funding stability and reduces reliance on capital markets. Short-term trends thus point to a technologically and commercially mature company that is maintaining a high growth rate across regions.

Shareholding structure

Nu has a strongly institutional shareholder structure: over 80% of the shares are held by large global investors and the float is 84% owned by institutions. The largest shareholders include BlackRock with 7.64%, Baillie Gifford with 6.64%, JPMorgan with nearly 5% and Capital Research with 4.9%. Insiders own only 4.7% of the shares, which is typical for publicly traded financial platforms after an expansion phase. The nearly 1,200 institutions holding shares is indicative of the high level of long-term capital interest in the company's growth story.

Analyst expectations

Analysts view the Q3 2025 results as further confirmation that Nu can grow over the long term at a pace unmatched in the global banking industry. Continued growth in the client base, further increases in ARPAC and expansion of the loan book are expected while maintaining stable asset quality. AI-first transformation is also a key focus for analysts, which can further reduce customer servicing costs and strengthen risk management.

The consensus outlook expects Nu to maintain an ROE of around 30% and continue to grow at double-digit rates on both revenue and earnings. Mexico is expected to gradually approach the penetration levels known from Brazil, while Colombia should be another growth driver in the coming years. If Nu delivers on its vision of an AI-first platform and maintains its current momentum, it could become one of the most profitable and scalable fintechs in the world.

Fair Price

Eli Lilly is once again stretching the boundaries of what modern obesity treatment can achieve. In its phase 3 TRIUMPH-4 study, the company reported that its new triple-agonist injection, retatrutide, produced an average 28.7% reduction in body weight over 68 weeks—a result that surpasses even the blockbuster Zepbound. For a portion of participants, the weight loss translated to more than 70 kilograms, setting a new benchmark for the entire GLP-1 category and solidifying Lilly’s leadership in next-generation metabolic medicine.

The broader market for weight-loss therapies is entering a new acceleration phase. Demand for GLP-1–based drugs such as Zepbound and Wegovy has already reshaped the pharmaceutical landscape, but retatrutide signals that the industry is only at the beginning of a multi-wave innovation cycle. Rather than representing the peak of the trend, today’s treatments may soon be seen as the first chapter of a much more potent “Obesity 2.0” revolution.

What exactly did retatrutide prove in phase 3

Retatrutide is given once a week and belongs to a class of so-called incretins - drugs that mimic the effects of gut hormones that affect hunger, metabolism and blood sugar regulation. Unlike the products used today, it has several key differences.

In the first large late-stage study, TRIUMPH-4, targeting patients with obesity and knee osteoarthritis, it showed:

• average 28.7% weight loss after 68 weeks at the highest dose
• an absolute loss of up to 71.2 pounds (over 32 kg) in some patients
• at the same time significant relief of knee pain and improvement in physical function
• more than one in eight patients was virtually free of knee pain after treatment

In doing so, Lilly has delivered numbers that exceed even the ambitious expectations of analysts. Previous mid-stage data showed approximately 24% weight loss after 48 weeks, and this bar was significantly raised in the late phase.

"Triple G": why is this mechanism different from Zepbound or Weg's

Today's obesitology hits like Zepbound or Wegovy are based on the agents tirzepatide and semaglutide, which target GLP-1 (or a combination of GLP-1 and GIP). Retatrutide goes even further and activates three receptors right away:

• GLP-1 - suppresses appetite, slows gastric emptying, helps lower glycemia
• GIP - another incretin hormone that modulates the metabolic response
• glucagon - a hormone that affects energy metabolism and fat burning

This "triple agonist" architecture has earned retatrutide the nickname "triple G" and experts expect that it is the combination of the three receptors that accounts for deeper and faster weight loss than today's standards. But at the same time, cross-study comparisons have their limitations - the population, baseline BMI, length of follow-up and method of data evaluation vary.

The competition is not sleeping: Novo Nordisk $NVO and the race for 'second generation' obesity drugs

Eli Lilly $LLY isn't the only one trying to take the GLP-1 era to the next level. Rival Novo Nordisk is developing its own "triple G" candidate, UBT251, which it licensed to its portfolio from China's United Laboratories. What this means for the market is that the battle for the next generation of obesity drugs will not just be between semaglutide and tirzepatide, but also between a new class of triple-agonists.

At the same time, it is becoming increasingly apparent that today it is not just about weight loss per se. Pharma is moving towards an "obesity-plus" model - that is, drugs that affect other comorbidities besides weight, such as:

• Osteoarthritis
• type 2 diabetes
• cardiovascular risk
• liver disease (e.g. non-alcoholic steatosis and NASH)

In this context, retatrutide is interesting precisely because it shows both massive weight reduction and joint pain relief and functional improvement in the same study.

Risks that investors must not ignore

But such a significant effect never comes without risks. There have been questions around retatrutide tolerance before, and even the first late-stage data show that:

• the proportion of patients who discontinue therapy due to adverse events is higher than for placebo
• common problems are nausea, indigestion and other typical gastrointestinal side effects
• a proportion of patients discontinued treatment due to 'too much' weight loss, which is a signal of strength of effect from a medical perspective but a potential complication from a real-world clinical practice perspective

Thus, regulators will be looking not only at absolute efficacy, but also at the safety and long-term tolerability profile - especially in patients who have other chronic diseases in addition to obesity.

The implications for Eli Lilly investors

From an investor perspective, retatrutide confirms several important theses:

• Lilly is consolidating its technology lead - Zepbound is already one of the most successful products on the market today, but retatrutide shows that the company has an even "sharper tool" in the pipeline for the heaviest obese patients.
• The obesity market will be multi-tiered - Cheaper, oral and less effective products may target the mass segment, while triple-agonists like retatrutide may target patients with extreme obesity and osteoarthritis-type complications.
• Competitive pressure on smaller players will intensify - Companies that have built an investment story on the "next GLP-1 candidate" may come under significant pressure if the second generation (triple-agonists) turn out to deliver even better numbers.
• Eli Lilly's valuation is already expecting a lot - $LLY stock has the huge success of the GLP-1 portfolio priced in, and retatrutide works more as a confirmation and extension of the story than as an entirely new narrative. A failure in the indication part would therefore be punished by the market.

Timing will also be important. Lilly itself states that seven other late-stage studies of retatrutide in obesity and diabetes are expected to end in 2026. Until then, investors will be looking primarily at the stability of the results, the safety profile, and whether the data will be as compelling outside the relatively specific patient population of obesity and knee arthritis.

Where the story may shift by 2030

If retatrutide proves successful across indications and the regulatory process goes smoothly, it has the potential to take the entire GLP-1 business to the next level by the end of the decade. Obesity will then definitively become a chronic, pharmacologically managed diagnosis, not just a "lifestyle problem", and revenues from this category could be comparable to the biggest blockbusters in history for the big pharma houses.

On the other hand, pressure for reimbursement, access regulation and long-term safety will intensify. For investors, retatrutide is thus not just about "a bigger percentage of the scale" but about whether Eli Lilly can maintain political, regulatory and social support for a massive expansion of these drugs into mainstream practice.

IBM’s plan to acquire Confluent marks one of its most consequential strategic moves za poslední dekádu. As AI adoption accelerates inside large enterprises, access to real-time, high-fidelity data has become the bottleneck limiting the deployment of mission-critical AI systems. By bringing Confluent’s streaming backbone into its ecosystem, IBM fills a gap that neither Watson.x nor Red Hat OpenShift could vyřešit samy: the ability to ingest, process and activate live operational data at global scale. In the corporate world, where milliseconds matter, this shift moves IBM from “AI tooling provider” to a genuine infrastructure leader.

The deeper significance lies in the fusion of Confluent’s Kafka-based engine with IBM’s enterprise reach. Financial institutions, telecoms, manufacturers and cyber-security operators increasingly depend on automated decision systems that must react to events in real time rather than historical snapshots. With Confluent’s subscription-driven model and high-margin architecture, IBM stands to strengthen not only its technological position but also the growth profile of its software division. Analysts already estimate that the acquisition could add more than two percentage points to Software growth in 2026–2027, underscoring how transformative this deal may become.

Top points:

• The acquisition of Confluent fundamentally strengthens IBM's ability to work with real-time data - a key component for AI.
• Confluent can add ~$600 million annually to IBM's Software segment revenues between 2026 and 2027.
• The technology enables IBM to connect the mainframe, hybrid cloud and Watson.x into one integrated system.
• It gives IBM a platform to compete with hyperscalers (AWS, Google Cloud, Azure) in real-time applications.
• The transaction increases the value of Red Hat OpenShift, Instana, Turbonomic and IBM's overall AI strategy.

Key acquisition

IBM $IBM has long built on two pillars: mainframe + enterprise software. In the last five years, a third has been added: Red Hat and hybrid cloud. But this whole architecture had one weak link - IBM didn't have its own strong technology for real-time data flows.

And real-time data is everything today.

• Generative AI needs a continuous flow of real-time data
• Enterprises are moving from static databases to event-driven systems
• IoT generates trillions of signals per day
• Financial institutions demand millisecond responses
• Cybersecurity relies on real-time streaming data

Confluent $CFLT is exactly the piece that IBM $IBM has been missing.

And not just technologically. Confluent is one of the fastest growing enterprise software companies in the world, with a robust subscription model and thousands of customers in mission-critical industries. This gives IBM not only a product, but also extensive market access.

Watson.x + Confluent = AI that works with actual data

Watson.x has been a powerful but partially isolated platform until now. Without real-time data, generative AI can only work with static files.

Confluent opens up unlimited access to AI models:

• transactional data
• customer interactions
• logistics events
• industrial sensors
• IT telemetry and security alerts

IBM finally offers AI that is not just smart on paper - it responds in real time.

Red Hat OpenShift gets a major upgrade

Confluent has native integration for containers and Kubernetes.

This means:

• Easier deployment in hybrid environments.
• Higher scalability
• a unified data layer across clouds

OpenShift was strong in control-plane management but weaker in event-driven data - Confluent erases this weakness.

Mainframe modernization - bridging old and new generations

Mainframe customers:

• Banks
• Insurance companies
• Governments
• large enterprise systems

These systems generate huge volumes of data, but rarely get it into modern cloud applications in real time.

Confluent will enable:

• stream events from the mainframe to modern cloud applications
• update data lines without overwriting legacy systems
• create a hybrid architecture that keeps pace with fintech/AI competitors

IBM no longer sells "old hardware" but the data backbone of future financial systems.

Real-time data is the new API of the world

Hyperscalers have been fighting this battle for years:

• Google $GOOG has Pub/Sub, Dataflow, Vertex AI
• AWS $AMZN dominates with Kinesis and MSK
• Microsoft $MSFT has Event Hubs and Azure Synapse

IBM suddenly found itself in a situation where:

• its customers need real-time infrastructure
• AI becomes a major competitive advantage
• hyperscalers are pushing into the enterprise sector

Recurring revenue of +$600 million per year (BofA $BAC estimate)

IBM's software segment has margins of 78-82%. Confluent runs on a subscription model ⇒ predictable revenue.

This means:

• EBIT growth
• stronger cash flow
• a higher share of software in total revenue

Synergies can be much higher than added revenue

The impact will not just be in Confluent's contribution. The biggest change will be Increase in the value of other IBM products:

• Higher adoption of Watson.x
• higher adoption of OpenShift
• mainframe modernization → additional revenue from consulting services
• acceleration of growth in the software segment

If IBM's software segment growth accelerates even from 5% to 7-8%, IBM's valuation could shift substantially.

Risks

• integration of cloud products tends to be challenging
• Tug-of-war between talent and key developers
• Customers may prefer Confluent Cloud for hyperscalers
• IBM must maintain speed of development → historically a weakness
• Regulatory limits on data flows in banking

Risks are manageable, but IBM needs to be faster technologically than it has been in the past.

Acquiring Confluent is not just a technology bet. It is a pure financial calculation to enable IBM to grow at a pace that would be unattainable without streaming technology. Confluent generates mostly subscription revenue, has gross margins of over 75%, and belongs to the data infrastructure segment, which is growing between 20-25% per year. This makes it exactly the type of asset that IBM has lacked for years - scalable, high-margin software that complements Red Hat i Watson.x.

Bank of America estimates that Confluent can add roughly $600 million in annual saleswhich represents 2% acceleration in IBM Software growth between 2026 and 2027. If this synergy materializes, IBM will gain a growth trajectory that will bring it closer to the valuation of modern software companies once again. But the key financial logic lies elsewhere: enterprise AI systems are not usable without real-time data. And it is Confluent that will enable IBM to offer an end-to-end solution - from the data layer to inference - that increases the value of every customer across IBM's entire portfolio.

So IBM isn't just buying a company. It's buying higher growth velocity, addressable market expansion, margin enhancement and acceleration of the cross-sell cycle across enterprise clients. In investment parlance, Confluent is not an expense, but a growth multiplier.

• Don't overlook: IBM | Q3 2025: The old giant accelerates and bets everything on AI

Valuation rerating scenario:

• Software segment growth above 10% → IBM Software P/S may rise from 3x to 4-5x.
• AI pipeline expansion due to Confluent → higher FCF multiple.
• IBM will strengthen share in enterprise AI, data infrastructure and hybrid cloud segments → growth phase similar to post Red Hat acquisition.

Investment scenarios

Optimistic scenario

In a best-case scenario, IBM manages to integrate Confluent faster than analysts expect, thereby significantly lifting the value of its software portfolio. The real-time data layer will immediately begin to increase the use of Watson.x, which, according to IBM's historical models, means a jump in enterprise adoption. Customers who have only been using IBM for part of their IT stack will move to comprehensive contracts that include AI, hybrid cloud and data integration. In practice, this synergy is far more powerful than any direct revenue from Confluent - in fact, it is accelerating the growth of the entire IBM Software category, which has the highest margins within the company. If this scenario comes to fruition, IBM can actually strengthen its position alongside hyperscalers, and the market will begin to value the company as a leader in real-time AI infrastructure. In such a situation, investors could see the stock rise 40% to 55% over the next 12-18 months, as IBM's valuation today still does not reflect the potential of modern AI services.

A realistic scenario

In the most likely scenario, the acquisition of Confluent will occur gradually. IBM will be able to organically integrate Confluent into Watson.x and Red Hat, but growth will unfold step by step, without dramatic leaps. The key effect will be to stabilize and slightly accelerate the growth of the software segment - something investors have long been calling for as IBM continues to fall behind the pace of hyperscalers. Real-time streaming will become the standard for IBM's large customers in banking, telecoms and the public sector, but the full synergies will only become apparent within two to three years. The company will begin to gradually improve margins and cash flow because Confluent's subscription model is predictable and highly profitable. In this scenario, the stock could rise 15-30% in 12 months, especially if IBM confirms that it can strengthen its software business faster than in past cycles.

Pessimistic scenario

In a negative turn of events, the integration of Confluent will prove more challenging than IBM anticipated. Integration costs may squeeze short-term margins, while some Confluent customers may stick with cloud-native versions that run on AWS or Google Cloud - which would weaken the cross-sell effect that IBM relies heavily on. In addition, hyperscalers may aggressively discount their alternatives (MSK, Pub/Sub), creating pricing pressure on IBM, which traditionally has not played the role of disruptive price leader. Add to that the slow implementation of real-time streaming into Watson.x, and the acquisition could act as a drag, not a catalyst, in the short term. In that case, investors would likely revise expectations downward and the stock could move in a range of stagnation to a 10-20% decline, especially if IBM fails to demonstrate clear synergies in the first 12 months after the deal closes.

What to take away from the article

• The acquisition of Confluent is exactly the type of move that IBM has been missing for a long time.
• AI without real-time data is a half-baked product - and IBM is gaining an absolutely critical data layer with this acquisition.
• Confluent can add about $600 million a year and accelerate the growth of IBM's software segment.
• This puts IBM in the middle of the hyperscaler war for real-time data and hybrid AI infrastructure.
• For investors, this may be the most important IBM deal in a decade.

Another rate cut, but where’s the rally? The Federal Reserve has lowered interest rates for the third time this year, yet investor enthusiasm is fading. Markets seem cautious, and key indices remain range-bound. Is this a signal of deeper concerns — or a setup for the next leg of the bull run?

The path of US interest rates from 2020

Yesterday's decision by the US Federal Reserve to cut interest rates represents a turning point for markets that have been in a phase of speculation, anticipation and switching between optimism and fear for months. After a long period of vigorous rate hikes to tame soaring inflation, there is now a shift in the opposite direction. Although markets have been internally resigned to this possibility for some time, the very moment of the decision has brought a new wave of impulses into the system that need to be thoroughly understood and put into a broader context. The rate cut is not just a technical monetary policy move. It is a signal that the central bank believes that the greatest inflationary danger is behind us, and at the same time it opens up space for a review of asset valuations or the cost of capital.

The immediate reaction of the markets

There was a positive mood in the markets immediately after the decision was announced. The S&P 500 index recorded a surge in gains. The index jumped by 0.73% during the hour (which included the subsequent press conference by Fed Chairman J. Poweel). Yields on 10-year Treasury bonds (US10Y) fell and the US dollar weakened slightly against major currencies.

This combination is consistent with the classic scenario of a reaction to monetary easing. Investors switch into a mode where they can invest in riskier assets, start to favour growth assets and revise upwards valuations. But it is not just a matter of one day. A rate cut, if it is not an isolated move but the beginning of a cycle, can trigger a large-scale shift of capital across asset classes and sectors. A change in the cost of funding means a different approach to pricing risk, a greater willingness to invest in projects with longer payback horizons and a strengthening of the attractiveness of equities relative to bonds.

The very act of cutting rates comes at a time when inflation, while slowing, remains above the Fed's 2% target. This is important because the Fed is sending a clear message. The risks to the economy are no longer coming primarily from overheating and rising prices, but from overly tight conditions and the threat of a slowdown.

Inflation developments in the United States since 2018

This shift in rhetoric and approach is also important from a market psychology perspective. Investors see a signal that the toughest phase of the battle against inflation may be over and that the Fed is ready to support the expansion if it is threatened. This reinforces the expectation that an accommodative monetary policy environment lies ahead. An environment that has historically been very supportive for equity markets.

Historical perspective

Indeed, a look at history suggests that the period after the first rate cut often brings an acceleration in equity returns. In 1995, 2001 and 2008, we saw stock markets rebound sharply after the Fed's policy change, albeit in different macroeconomic backdrops. However, it is key to understand that not all rate cuts are the same. If the Fed cuts rates in response to a slowing economy, recession or collapse in demand, the market may not react in a clearly positive way. But if the rate cut comes at a time when inflation is falling and the economy is maintaining a solid growth rate, it is an ideal combination that allows markets to rise. And this is what the current period could be like.

What do the different sectors have to say?

In terms of sectoral impact, we can expect the growth sectors in particular to benefit from this development. The technology, consumer goods or real estate sectors have historically been among the most sensitive to changes in the yield environment. Lower rates mean cheaper financing, higher net present value of future earnings and a greater willingness of investors to accept higher valuations. At the same time, there is increasing pressure on sectors such as banks that benefit from higher margins at high rates. Traditionally defensive segments, such as utilities, may also face some capital outflows as their relative attractiveness declines with increasing demand for growth.

S&P 500 Index

The S&P 500 is now in a very vulnerable phase. The index is trading near all-time highs, with investors expecting strong seasonal performance, while valuations are well above long-term averages. A rate cut could therefore either further support this rise or cause a sharp correction if further macro data disappoint. The key will be to watch the next inflation reports, labour market data and especially the rhetoric of Fed members. If the central bank signals that it plans further cuts. In 2026, however, it may not be that simple.

Inconsistency within the Fed

The Federal Reserve's latest decision to cut rates further showed unusual inconsistency among its members FOMC (Federal Open Market Committee). While a majority voted to continue easing monetary policy, a growing minority voiced opposition to the move, arguing that inflationary pressures persist and economic fundamentals do not require further cuts. It is this view that has been increasingly vocal, particularly from regional Fed presidents, who fear that easing too quickly could renew inflation risks over the longer term.

At the same time, the minutes of the last Fed meeting (FOMC minutes) show that some central bankers see the current macroeconomic developments as stable enough that it would be preferable to leave rates longer at current levels and wait for further data. Others, on the other hand, insist that the economy continues to slow and weaker labour market and industrial production numbers are reason enough to support growth despite the lower cost of capital. This clash of views caused the decision to cut rates to be majority but not unanimous.

The inconsistency also complicates communication to the public. Governor Jerome Powell has tried to maintain a unified message in recent press conferences, but journalists and analysts have noted differences in rhetoric among members. This can increase volatility in the markets as investors lose a clear compass on the Fed's next policy move. If this internal split deepens in the future, it will be more difficult for the central bank to maintain credibility and effectively manage market expectations.

The yield curve

The decline in interest rates has a direct impact on the the yield curve - a graphical representation of the difference between short-term and long-term rates. When the Fed cuts short-term rates and long-term yields remain stable or fall only slightly, a so-called "resteepening" of the curve occurs. That is, the yield curve begins to flatten after a previous inversion. An inverted yield curve (where short-term yields exceed long-term yields) is often considered a precursor to a recession. However, once the curve begins to flatten due to monetary easing, it may signal that the risk of recession is fading and that the market is beginning to believe in a soft landing, a scenario where inflation is reduced without a significant slowdown in the economy. This phenomenon is closely watched by investors as it has a major impact on asset allocation and sector selection.

US Treasuries Yield Curve

Current stock valuations

Earnings multiples, specifically the ratio of stock price to expected earnings (forward P/E), tend to be sensitive to the level of interest rates. When rates are high, investors discount future earnings more heavily and are therefore willing to pay lower multiples. Conversely, when rates fall, the attractiveness of future earnings increases and the market is willing to accept higher valuations. The current forward P/E of the S&P 500 is above 30, a historically high number. In the past, such as 2017-2018 or 2020-2021, similar multiples have occurred in an environment of low rates and strong optimism about technology growth. Therefore, if current monetary policy continues on its easing path and there is no significant deterioration in macro data, the market can defend this valuation - especially if corporate profitability starts to improve.

The evolution of the S&P 500 P/E Index from 2022

In a historical context, it is important to understand that the period after the first rate cut is not always a linear growth story. For example, in 2001, the Fed also began a rate cut cycle, but the market continued to sell off nonetheless - mainly due to the bubble and recession at the time. Conversely, in 1995 or 2019, the first cut marked the impetus for the start of a multi-year growth cycle. The difference was one of context: in 2001, the market was struggling with high valuations with no gains, while in 2019 it was a reaction to a global slowdown, not a structural problem. And it is this difference that remains key today.

Conclusion

Valuations may be high again, but technology companies like Apple $AAPL, Microsoft $MSFT and Nvidia $NVDA are now showing strong margins, revenue growth and tangible results from investments in artificial intelligence and cloud technologies. In other words, current valuations are not just based on expectations, but on a realistic earnings basis. According to the S&P 500 Index, the estimates to rise as much as 16% next year, and if rates remain lower, the market could maintain that pace through 2026.

In conclusion, the Fed's rate cut is a major event that has the potential to change the direction of the entire market. It is a signal that the toughest phase of the battle against inflation is likely over. Whether this will lead to a new growth cycle will depend on other data - inflation trends, the strength of the labour market, the outlook for corporate earnings and the geopolitical climate.

Disney closes fiscal 2025 as a fundamentally reshaped company, one that dokázal zvýšit profitability even in a quarter of flat revenue. The fourth quarter shows a business driven less by box-office volatility and more by stable, repeatable cash engines: parks, streaming and live sports. While revenue held steady at 22.5 billion dollars, operating income more than doubled and EPS expanded at a pace that would ještě před rokem působilo nepravděpodobně. For investors, it signals a company that finally nachází rovnováhu mezi kreativní produkcí a provozní efektivitou.

Beneath the headline numbers, Disney’s internal architecture is changing. Parks and Experiences continue to hit all-time highs thanks to global demand and disciplined reinvestment, streaming has entered a sustainable profit track, and ESPN’s stabilization brings long-awaited clarity to the sports segment. With segment operating income up 12 % for the full year and cash generation meaningfully stronger, Disney enters FY26 as a more predictable, more profitable and strategically focused enterprise než v jakékoli fázi poslední dekády.

How was the last quarter?

The fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 can be characterized as a period of stable sales but significantly higher profitability. Revenue of $22.5 billion was virtually comparable to Q4 2024, but pre-tax profit more than doubled to $2.0 billion. Total segment operating profit was down 5% year-on-year to $3.5 billion, reflecting a challenging comparative period, particularly in film distribution, but the bottom line benefited from improved efficiencies and business mix. Diluted EPS in the quarter jumped from $0.25 to $0.73, with adjusted EPS of $1.11, just 3% below the very strong Q4 2024.

From a segment perspective, Q4 was mixed, but the overall picture for investors remains favorable. Entertainment took a noticeable hit due to tough comparisons to last year's record movie line-up, with the hugely successful titles Inside Out 2 and Deadpool & Wolverine entering the results. Entertainment's segment operating profit for the quarter was $691 million, down $376 million from a year ago. On the other hand, Direct-to-Consumer streaming continued its surprisingly rapid improvement, with DTC sales up 8% year-over-year (despite a roughly two-point negative impact from last year's inclusion of Disney+ Hotstar) and operating profit up $99 million to $352 million. Disney+ and Hulu together already have 196 million subscribers, up 12.4 million from the third quarter, with Disney+ alone adding 3.8 million to 132 million subscribers.

The sports segment remained relatively stable. Operating profit was $911 million, only slightly below last year's level, when higher marketing and programming costs outweighed growth in advertising and subscription revenue. Domestic ESPN reported a 3% decline in operating profit, but domestic advertising revenue grew 8%, a positive signal for the monetization of sports rights. The real driver of the quarter was Experiences. This division reported a record Q4 operating profit of $1.9 billion, up $219 million from last year. International Parks and Experiences increased profits 25% to $375 million, while Domestic Parks increased 9% to $920 million. Thus, from a portfolio-wide perspective, Disney has shown that even without extraordinary blockbusters, it can generate high profits, lean on growing parks and move streaming into the profitable phase.

• Full presentation with results.

CEO commentary

Bob Iger in his comments, emphasized that fiscal 2025 was another year of substantial strength for the company. He said Disney $DIS is successfully capitalizing on its creative and brand assets across its entire ecosystem - from theaters and TV channels to streaming to parks and experiences - while making tangible progress in turning its direct-to-consumer business into a profitable pillar. Iger's strategy is built on a combination of complementary businesses and a strong balance sheet that allows the company to continue to invest in premium content and experiences while increasing return on capital for shareholders.

The CEO also clearly articulated that the goal is not just short-term margin improvement, but more importantly, long-term anchoring of Disney in a new era of the entertainment industry dominated by streaming platforms, global franchises and the experience economy. Iger highlighted Experiences' record performance, DTC's gradual transition into a profitable business, and the fact that Disney has a unique portfolio of brands and IP that can be monetized across multiple channels. It is clear from his words that management is confident in the company's ability to sustain double-digit earnings growth in the years ahead.

Outlook

The outlook for fiscal 2026 and 2027 is ambitious but backed by concrete numbers and clearly defined milestones. For Q1 of fiscal year 2026, Disney expects DTC SVOD operating profit of around $375 million, confirming that streaming is no longer a "black hole" for capital but is becoming a regular contributor to profitability. On the other hand, the Entertainment segment will face a roughly $400m negative impact in Q1 due to weaker comparative movie releases, lower political ads (down $140m from last year) and also the absence of a contribution from Star India, which generated $73m of operating profit in Q1 last year. Experiences will be saddled with approximately $150 million of pre-opening and dry dock costs in the Disney Cruise Line division in the early part of the year.

For the full fiscal year 2026, management is targeting double-digit percentage growth in segment operating profit in Entertainment, weighted more toward the second half of the year, while achieving roughly 10% operating margin in DTC SVOD. Sports should grow in the low single-digit percentages, with the largest contribution expected in the fourth quarter due to the timing of sports rights costs. Experiences should add high single-digit percentage earnings despite $160 million of pre-opening costs and $120 million of dry dock costs. The company plans $24 billion of content investment across Entertainment and Sports, roughly $19 billion of operating cash flow, $9 billion of capex and a doubling of share buybacks to $7 billion. The dividend for 2026 will be $1.50 per share in two installments of $0.75. For fiscal 2027, Disney then expects another double-digit growth in adjusted EPS, underscoring management's confidence in its long-term profitability trajectory.

Long-term results

The long-term trend in Disney $DISresults shows a company that is successfully adapting to structural changes in the industry. Revenues have increased at a steady pace in recent years, reaching $94.4 billion in 2025, up 3.35% from 2024 and nearly 14% from 2022. The more significant change comes at the margin level. Gross profit is up more than 9% to $35.7 billion in 2025, while operating profit is up 16% to $13.8 billion. This builds on double-digit growth in previous years and points to a structural shift in profitability, driven largely by a more efficient mix between traditional TV channels, streaming and parks.

Most telling, however, is the evolution of net income and earnings per share. Net income has grown from $2.35 billion in 2023 to $4.97 billion in 2024 and to $12.4 billion in 2025. Diluted EPS has moved from $1.29 to $2.72 to $6.85 in two years, more than five times 2023 levels. In addition to higher operating profitability, tax factors also played a role, with a significant change in the tax burden in 2025, turning a positive levy in previous years into a tax benefit. EBITDA increased from roughly $12.0 billion to $19.1 billion over the 2022-2025 period, illustrating the company's strengthening cash-flow profile. The number of shares outstanding has been declining slightly over time, supporting EPS growth and showing that Disney is beginning to rely on share buybacks again as part of its return on capital.

News

In terms of strategic direction, fiscal 2025 brought several key highlights. The most notable is a clear shift in streaming - DTC SVOD gradually moved into the profit zone during the year, and Disney openly communicates targeting double-digit operating margins in the coming years. The growth in the total subscriber base to 196 million, coupled with tighter pricing and a focus on ARPU, shows that a model built on premium content and strong brands is working. At the same time, the company has completed transactions around Star India, which reduces the contribution of some linear channels in the short term, but helps to clean up the portfolio and focus on more profitable segments in the long term.

Accelerating capital allocation towards shareholders is also significant news. Disney has raised and stabilized its dividend, doubled its planned share repurchases to $7 billion for fiscal 2026, and further strengthened its cash-flow profile, with free cash flow for 2025 reaching over $10 billion. The Experiences division, including parks, resorts and cruise line, has established itself as a steady growth engine with record earnings, yet the company continues to invest in new Disney Adventure and Disney Destiny ships, which are expected to deliver further capacity and revenue growth in the coming years.

Shareholding structure

Disney's shareholder structure is distinctly institutional. Insiders hold only roughly 0.07% of the company's shares, while institutions control approximately 75.7% of all shares and virtually the same proportion of the free float. This confirms that Disney is a core position in the portfolios of many large global investors. The largest shareholder is Vanguard Group with approximately 8.86%, followed by JPMorgan Chase with 7.59%, BlackRock with 7.11% and State Street with 4.59%. In total, nearly four thousand institutional investors hold shares of the company. Such a concentrated and institutional ownership structure is common for large blue-chip companies and suggests a high degree of professional capital confidence in the long-term Disney story.

Analysts' expectations

BofA Securities reiterated its Buy rating on the stock. and $140.00 price target on the entertainment giant. The company has forecast double-digit growth in adjusted earnings per share for fiscal 2026, driven by low single-digit operating earnings growth in Sports, double-digit operating earnings growth in Entertainment, and high single-digit operating earnings growth in Experiences.

Fair Price

Rates cut!

The Fed a short while ago announced a 25 basis-point rate cut and signaled to investors that it sees only 1 more rate cut in 2026.

And if that wasn't enough, the decision on today’s cut was far from clear within the Fed. The central bank is literally split in two.

Today the central bank voted in a divided decision to lower its benchmark interest rate to a range of 3.5% to 3.75%. This is the third rate cut this year.

The president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jeff Schmid, and the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Austan Goolsbee, dissented and preferred to keep rates unchanged. On the other hand, Fed governor Stephen Miran advocated for a half-percentage-point cut.

Decisions on future Fed policy will likely look different next year. They will depend on the newly elected chair of the central bank who will replace J. Powell.

Trump reportedly already has his pick. And given that the U.S. president wants to continue cutting rates, we could even see surprises in the form of multiple rate cuts.

China’s biggest tech giants are wasting no time. After President Donald Trump signaled that Nvidia’s H200 accelerator could be cleared for export, ByteDance and Alibaba reportedly approached Nvidia to explore large-scale purchases. According to Reuters, the inquiries could translate into some of the largest Chinese AI-chip orders in a year, driven by the fact that H200 offers a generational leap in training performance compared with the limited hardware China is currently allowed to buy. For companies racing to build and refine frontier AI models, access to H200 would dramatically shift the competitive landscape.

The situation is made even more unusual by the regulatory quirks surrounding it. Beijing still restricts imports of earlier, weaker chips such as the H100 and A100, while Washington may now allow access to a processor that is significantly more advanced. Whether China’s regulators approve these purchases remains an open question, as does Nvidia’s ability to supply enough units in a global market strained by insatiable AI demand. What is clear is that the episode highlights the volatility and unpredictability of the AI hardware ecosystem in an era of geopolitical tension.

Why the H200 is so crucial for Chinese giants

H200 is nearly six times more powerful than the H20, which was the most advanced chip to legally travel to China to date. While Chinese manufacturers have accelerated development of their own accelerators in recent years, they are still significantly weaker at training large language models, according to Reuters sources. Homegrown chips are better suited for inference, not the demanding pre-training that requires thousands of GPUs working in synchronised clusters.

As a result, virtually all of China's large AI infrastructure today is built on Nvidia - from universities to the private models of large tech companies. Some institutions were even trying to acquire the H200 through the grey market before Trump's announcement, according to documents and tenders, showing the market's huge appetite for a more powerful generation of AI chips.

Political reality: China is silent for now, companies are waiting for a signal

Beijing has not yet officially confirmed whether it will allow the purchases. According to The Information, Chinese regulators have summoned representatives of major firms to gauge their exact demand - and have hinted that a decision will come soon. Meanwhile, in recent months, the government has severely curtailed purchases of US AI chips in state-funded projects in an effort to encourage the emergence of a domestic semiconductor industry.

Chinese firms are therefore proceeding cautiously. They are considering large orders, but want a guarantee that the government will explicitly approve the purchases. At the same time, they are also addressing an important practical question - whether Nvidia $NVDA will be able to supply them. Production of the H200 is running in limited quantities as Nvidia focuses on the next-generation Blackwell and Ruby, for which there is record global interest.

• Don't overlook: Michael Burry vs. AI mania: The legend of "The Big Short" bets on the fall of tech stars

Why the situation is so bizarre: A more powerful chip is less regulated than a weaker one

Biggest paradox:

• H100 and A100 remain subject to strict export controls
• H200which is more powerful, newer and more expensive, got an exemption

The result is a market that resembles a technological anomaly. In practice, this means that Chinese firms can buy product that is far superior in performance to chips that have long been 'banned'.

But this state of affairs may not last long - China plans to assess the intended use for each order, according to sources, as it makes a parallel push to encourage domestic production from firms such as Huawei and Cambricon. For Chinese tech firms, the H200 may thus be a valuable but perhaps short-lived opportunity to regain at least some of the AI computing advantage.

Nvidia between geopolitics and demand boom

For Nvidia, the combination of political decisions and the global hunger for AI chips is strategically crucial. The company has already suffered a significant drop in market share in China following a series of bans on the purchase of its most powerful chips. Thus, the ability to sell the H200 represents a chance to regain some of that giant market. On the other hand, the company cannot even meet demand from the United States or Europe, as most of its resources go into the Blackwell generation.

If Chinese orders were to take off, it is likely that they would be quiet, without publicity and without the disruptive effects that would trigger further political reaction in Washington. As one Chinese executive put it, "Chinese companies will buy a lot, but quietly."

H200 vs. H20 vs. Huawei's home-grown chips

Chinese firms are pushing for the H200 because the difference between that chip and the alternatives is dramatic. The performance differences directly impact how quickly companies like Alibaba $BABA or ByteDancecan train their most advanced models.

What investors need to know:

• The H200 is nearly six times more powerful than the H20which is currently the most advanced model legally available in China.
• The H200 is optimized for training large modelswhile Huawei and Cambricon's home-grown chips are better suited for inference, not training.
• H20 is not enough for training - companies only take it as a temporary replacement due to restrictions.
• Huawei Ascend 910B offers solid performance, but still lags in scaling and efficiency, which are key to developing foundation models.
• Chinese firms stand by Nvidia - without the H200, they cannot compete with the US in the short term in developing high-end multimodal GPT-4/5 generation models.
• Beijing hesitatesbecause it wants to protect the domestic semiconductor industry, but it also knows that domestic chips do not yet have the power or ecosystem needed for high-end training.

Investment implications: what H200 means for Nvidia stock

Investors are watching H200 as a potential catalyst that can temporarily restore some of Nvidia's Chinese revenue and mitigate the negative effect of sanctions. But the impacts are not clear-cut - the opportunities and risks are intertwined.

Key points for investors:

• Possible return of Chinese revenues: If Beijing allows purchases, orders could be in the billions of dollars, even if they are less visible, low-profile transactions.
• The H200 is one of Nvidia's most profitable products: The chip has high gross margins, so even limited supply can significantly boost short-term profitability.
• Capacity constraints remain an issue: Nvidia doesn't have enough production - the top priority is the Blackwell generation. This means that Chinese orders may mean diverting capacity from other markets.
• Political risk is extremely high: The Trump administration's exemption may be revoked or changed. Both the U.S. and China can modify the rules at any time.
• Strategically, this is not a long-term product: For Nvidia, the H200 is just a transitional generation. Future company valuations will be driven mainly by the Blackwell and Rubin families.
• Investor sentiment will be very reactive: every signal from Beijing, every statement from the US administration and every comment from the CEO Jensen Huang could cause significant movement in NVDA stock.

The latest dividend increase did more than nudge the payout higher — it confirmed the strategic discipline of a company, whose financial architecture has been designed for resilience. While many high-yield sectors rely on volatile commodities or leverage-heavy business models, this firm continues to expand its distribution capacity through predictable revenue streams, strong retention and a product suite embedded deeply in industrial and medical infrastructure. A 12% hike is not a marketing gesture; it is a financial statement backed by durable cash flow and long planning cycles.

What differentiates this business is the structural strength of its model. Long-term service agreements, entrenched customer relationships and global exposure allow the company to navigate economic slowdowns with minimal turbulence. Even when cyclical demand cools, the operational core remains intact, margins expand and free cash flow consistently covers both reinvestment and shareholder returns. For dividend-focused investors, few combinations offer this level of visibility, durability and upward trajectory.

Top Points

• A rising dividend is no accident, but a reflection of stable cash flow and over 30 years of dividend discipline.
• The company has once again strengthened margins and significantly increased earnings, increasing the scope for future payout growth.
• The valuation is higher than the sector average but reflects the quality, stability and low risk of the business.
• Strong free cash flow growth ensures that dividends remain safe even in a worse economic period.
• A key driver in the years ahead will be the growth in demand for water management, sanitation and smart industrial solutions.

Company Profile

Company Ecolab $ECL operates in a market segment that is boring at first glance but absolutely critical from a macro perspective: industrial hygiene, water treatment, sanitation and operational safety. These areas are not optional - companies in the food, energy, pharmaceutical, hospitality or healthcare industries cannot simply skimp on hygiene or water systems.

This makes business extremely predictable. Revenues are growing slowly but steadily, while margins remain above average. Very few companies in the market have such a high proportion of repeat contracts and such deeply rooted customer relationships. Companies change hygiene suppliers only in rare cases, because the processes are integrated directly into the operation.

This creates a clean environment for long-term dividend and cash flow growth.

A broad portfoliowhich is built on three pillars

Water & Process Technologies

Solutions for the purification, recycling and optimization of water in production processes.

• Industrial plants, energy, petrochemicals
• Filtration, reverse osmosis, corrosion prevention, water quality monitoring

This segment is growing due to global pressure for more efficient water management and a regulatory environment that is becoming increasingly stringent.

Institutional Hygiene & Cleaning Systems

Comprehensive hygiene systems for hotels, restaurants, hospitals and care facilities.

• Automated cleaning systems
• Disinfection, sterilization, pathogen control
• digital hygiene monitoring

Reliability, compliance and risk minimization are important to these customers. Any misconduct would be extremely costly reputationally and legally.

Food Safety & Sanitation

Solutions for food processing plants, fast food chains or meat processors.

• Sanitation of production lines
• contamination detection
• optimization of chemical and water consumption

Financial performance - quality growth that can be seen and felt

Last year's results show exactly what a dividend investor is looking for: a healthy combination of growth, margin improvement and strong free cash flow generation.

Year-on-year improvement is evident in every key parameter:

• Earnings are up nearly 54%.
• operating margin climbed to 16.9%
• gross margin improved significantly due to better input prices
• FCF increased to almost USD 1.82 billion

But it's not just about the numbers. The important thing is that growth is not driven by aggressive expansions or savings that cannot be repeated. The performance is the result of systematic improvements: modernizing operations, digitizing services, streamlining the supply chain and growing the water management segment.

Valuation - quality simply doesn't come cheap

This company is a classic example of a company that has been growing for a long time, has a high moat and produces stable cash flow. The market values such businesses at a premium - and it shows here.

Key metrics

• P/E: approx. 21×
• P/S: 2.7×
• P/B: 7.5×
• P/CF: 25×

Expensive at first glance, but in fact typical of top "compounders" that can increase capital value even in a recession. So the investor is not paying for revenue growth - they are paying for predictability, stability, low risk and high margins.

Dividend analysis

Dividend up 12%, which is above the long-term average and also confirms that the company has entered a stronger growth period.

• Dividend yield: approx. 1.1% - low but stable
• Payout ratio: 40-45% → well below risk
• Cash flow coverage: dividend covered almost 2x

The strength of the dividend rests on three pillars:

1. Stable contracts with global clientele
2. high margins and cost control
3. cost structure that allows payouts to grow even in bad times

Opportunities - where the company can still grow significantly

• Water Management: The world is addressing water scarcity, the industry is pushing to minimize consumption. This segment will grow double digits.
• Digitalization of sanitation: Sensors, consumption monitoring, automated systems - a new cluster of high margin services.
• Growth in healthcare and pharmaceuticals: Strictest regulation = stable demand.
• Expansion in energy and manufacturing services: Higher operating standards open up space for new products.
• M&A strategy: traditionally successful model of buying smaller technology players.

Management

Strong margin growth, stable dividend policy and consistent expansion are no accident. Ecolab is run by a pair that has deep technical and operational backgrounds and can combine traditional industrial chemistry with digitalization and data platforms.

CEO Christophe Beck - architect of the transformation

Beck took over in 2021 but has been with the company for more than 15 years. His main contributions:

• Redirecting capital to the water segment (highest growth across the portfolio).
• expansion of the Ecolab3D digital platform enabling predictive management of water hygiene and consumption
• stabilisation of margins during periods of chemical input inflation
• focus on long-term contracts with major industry players

Beck's management style is based on the idea that Ecolab is not a chemical company, but an operating partnerto help clients optimise costs. This significantly increases switching costs.

CFO Scott Kirkland - Discipline in costs and cash flow

Kirkland came to Ecolab after a long career at 3M. His footprint can be seen in:

• Improved working capital and higher profit-to-cash flow conversion
• optimizing capital investments
• reducing debt while growing the dividend
• more rigorous measurement of return on investment (ROIC)

The market of the future: the industry outlook for the coming years

Ecolab operates in sectors that are not cyclical but structurally growing. This is a key difference from companies that depend on economic cycles.

The three strongest growth megatrends

Water scarcity and pressure to recycle - Expected growth in the industrial water treatment market: 6.5-7% CAGR to 2030.

• World water consumption growing 2x faster than population
• Industry consumes 40% of all available water
• Regulation in the US, EU and Asia tightens recycling standards

Raising hygiene standards in food and healthcare. Expected growth of food safety market: 6-8% CAGR.

• • Globalization of food chains → higher contamination risks
  • Hospitals and pharmacies introduce automated disinfection systems
  • Emerging standards will not disappear after a pandemic

Automation and digitalization of hygiene processes. Here Ecolab has one of the strongest technological moats with Ecolab3D.

• e-monitoring of water consumption
• sensors detecting microbial contamination
• predictive maintenance and auditing software

These trends are creating an environment in which demand is not growing by leaps and bounds, but steadily and over the long termwhich is the ideal basis for stable dividend and cash flow growth.

Segmented revenue structure: where growth and stability occur

Ecolab's business is diversified across industry, healthcare and institutions. This creates a balanced portfolio with different dynamics.

Revenue distribution by segment:

• Industrial Water & Process - ~45% of revenue
• Institutional Cleaning & Hospitality - ~30 %
• Healthcare & Life Sciences - ~15 %
• Food Safety & Other - ~10 %

What are the growth profiles?

• Fastest growing: Healthcare & Water Treatment
• Highest Margins: Institutional Cleaning
• Lowest cyclicality: Life Sciences & Food Safety

What investors need to understand:

• Core segments (hospitality, institutional cleaning) are holding steady
• Growth segments (water, healthcare) push valuations up
• the entire structure allows the company to grow even in a recession because hygiene and water are not sectors that can be "turned off"

Moat & switching costs: why Ecolab's clients hardly change suppliers

Switching costs are not a marketing concept at Ecolab, but a reality of operations.

Reasons why switching suppliers is extremely costly:

• hygiene procedures are certified for specific Ecolab systems
• dosing and measuring equipment is integrated into customers' operations
• changing the chemical system may require adjustments to process parameters
• switching can mean production downtime (the most expensive factor)
• Ecolab also provides employee training and audit support

Result:

• over 90% of clients have long-term contracts with the company
• Customer retention is among the highest in the industrial sector

Analytical predictions

Analysts agree that Ecolab has a period of steady growth ahead, mainly due to water management and improving margins.

JPMorgan (rating: Overweight)

• Target Price: $260
• Reason: segment growth Water + accelerating margins
• expected EPS growth: 13% annually

Morgan Stanley (Overweight)

• Price target: $255
• Emphasis on: expansion of Ecolab3D, contracts with life sciences customers
• argument: "the most predictable cash flow in the sector"

Bank of America (Buy)

• Target price: USD 270
• ROI on water and sanitation investments well above market average
• FCF outlook: continued growth of 10-12% annually

Consensus for the next 12-month period

• Average target price: USD 255-265
• Expected EBITDA growth: 8-10 %
• Dividend growth: 8-12% per annum

Investment scenarios

Optimistic scenario

In the most favourable scenario, Ecolab would benefit from the continued tightening of industry regulations, which are fuelling demand for advanced water treatment. Under these conditions, the Water & Process segment could grow at double-digit rates as companies in the manufacturing, energy and petrochemical sectors begin to invest in water reduction and recycling. In parallel, the Ecolab3D digitization platform would gain dominance as an analytical tool that helps customers reduce costs and contamination risks. This would bring a further shift in margins - especially as services and digital monitoring carry significantly higher returns than traditional chemical products.

If this scenario were to come to fruition, the company could grow at double-digit earnings rates for several years, boosting free cash flow above the $2 billion per year mark. The market would price in this development by expanding the valuation back to the upper range of premium multiples, approximately a P/E of 30 times. The stock could then move into the $280-300 price range and Ecolab would once again be among the leaders of the quality compounders.

A realistic scenario

The most likely path, however, is the middle ground, which is consistent with the long-term nature of Ecolab's business. In this scenario, the company continues its standard revenue growth rate of around 6-8%, driven by a combination of pricing power, gradual digitization and organic service expansion. The water segment will maintain solid momentum, although not explosive growth, and the healthcare and hospitality hygiene systems will continue to benefit from stringent food safety and cleaning standards.

Such a development would imply a gradual improvement in margins, continuous free cash flow growth towards $1.9 billion and similarly steady dividend growth. The market would value the company as a premium but not a fast-growing business, and the valuation would likely hover around a P/E of 24-26×. Under these conditions, the share price can be expected to rise into the $250-265 area, which represents a modest outperformance relative to the broader market, built on stability, not risk.

Pessimistic scenario

The biggest threat to Ecolab's results is a situation where the global industry slows investment in water system upgrades due to a weaker economy or constrained budgets. This would lead to the deferral of projects that today form the core of the Water & Process segment's growth. Add to this a significant increase in input chemicals and logistics costs that the company could not quickly pass on to clients, and margins would come under pressure. In addition, the Hospitality & Institutional segment would show weaker momentum in a cooling economic environment, which would reduce the overall growth of the company.

Such a combination would slow earnings growth to low single digits, free cash flow would fall to around $1.6-1.7 billion, and the market would begin to value Ecolab as a defensive industrial firm rather than a premium compounder. Valuations could compress to a P/E of around 20-22 times and the stock would fall into the $210-230 range. It would still be a financially stable company, but without the growth momentum that has helped it outperform the market in recent years.

What to take away from the article

• Ecolab is a global leader in hygiene, water purification and sanitation - areas that are not cyclical and whose demand has been growing for a long time.
• Key to the company's strength are recurring contracts, extremely high switching costs and deep integration into clients' operations.
• The biggest opportunities lie in the expansion of the water segment and digital services, which have much higher margins than traditional chemical products.
• The financial results show structural margin growth, a steady increase in cash flow and a very healthy debt ratio.
• The dividend policy is sustainable even in bad times - the company has a payout well below 50% and a strongly growing FCF.
• Valuation is not low, but is consistent with the quality and defensive nature of the business.
• Scenarios suggest slightly asymmetric upside potential, mainly due to the long-term trend of efficient water management.

Latest data from the JOLTS survey shows the number of vacant positions in the U.S. has stabilized — but hiring and turnover dynamics have shifted. With job openings holding around 7.7 million and worker mobility dwindling, the report paints a more sober picture of demand for labor. These trends matter: for wages, inflation, and crucially for how the Federal Reserve might steer its next move. Understanding JOLTS now is key to decoding where the economy — and markets — may head next.

The evolution of Job Openings Total Nonfarm (1M) from 2020

Current state of the labor market according to JOLTS (December 2025)

The latest JOLTS report, released yesterday containing data for October 2025, paints a picture of a labor market that is gradually losing its earlier strength. The number of job openings remained virtually unchanged in October at 7.7 million. Positions. By comparison, even earlier in the year, the number of vacancies was significantly higher, exceeding 11 million at the post-pandemic peak in 2022. There was even a surprising jump of 431,000 vacancies to a total of 7.66 million in September 2025 (the data for which was delayed due to the temporary government shutdown), indicating that labor demand remained unexpectedly strong at that time. However, the October figures did not confirm any further increase - the number of open positions stagnated around 7.67 million.

In addition to the number of openings, JOLTS tracks hiring and separations. In October, the number of hires was 5.1 million, almost as high as the number of separations (the sum of voluntary separations and layoffs) of 5.1 million. In other words, employment was almost unchanged on net. Voluntary separations remained at 2.9 million in October, while layoffs and firings rose to 1.9 million. Both figures were little changed from the previous month.

More important, however, is their trend. The rate at which Americans are voluntarily leaving their jobs to move elsewhere has fallen to 1.8%, the lowest since May 2020. By comparison, it was 2.0% as recently as September and reached a record ~3% during the "Great Resignation" of 2021-2022 (an all-time high was 3.0% in November 2021. Similarly, the job entry rate has fallen to 3.2% - a level last seen roughly 10 years ago (excluding the pandemic spike). In other words, Americans are currently entering new jobs at the slowest rate since 2013 and voluntarily leaving at the lowest rate since 2014. This confirms that the labor market has lost some of its earlier momentum.

United States Jobs Quit (1M) since 2016

In contrast, the layoff rate has increased slightly in recent months, albeit from historically low levels. This is a warning sign. Low hiring means that laid-off workers are having a hard time finding new jobs, so if the layoff rate continues to rise, unemployment could jump very quickly. It is this concern that the analyst mentions Elise Gould: weak hiring combined with rising layoffs increases the risk that the unemployment curve will begin to rise steeply. So far, the rise has not been dramatic, with the layoff rate holding around 1.2%, still low in historical terms, but the trend has taken a turn for the worse.

Thus, the overall picture from JOLTS suggests that the U.S. labor market is cooling: employers are no longer adding jobs at the pace they used to, hiring is more cautious, and employees are less likely to quit because they are less confident of finding a better job. Yet the labour market cannot be said to have collapsed. Rather, the situation is stable. And that brings us to the central bank.

Fed officials probably want to prevent the labour market from weakening further and will therefore proceed to cut interest rates further despite still elevated inflation. Markets are expecting a 0.25ppt rate cut into the 3.50%-3.75% range in response to signals of a slowing labour market.

Predictions for future interest rate movements in the US

How JOLTS data affects the Fed and the inflation outlook

JOLTS data has become a closely watched indicator for Fed monetary policy in recent years. The Fed has dual priorities: price stability (low inflation) and maximum employment. After the pandemic, the U.S. struggled with soaring inflation, and one of the causes was the extraordinary tightness of the labor market. Many vacancies, record numbers of workers leaving for better offers and the resulting rapid wage growth. Central bankers therefore started to raise interest rates to cool the economy, while keeping a close eye on indicators such as the number of new jobs and job losses.

The economic research supports them in this: Studies by Alex Domash and Lawrence Summers showed that job openings and voluntary quits rates are as important, if not more important, in predicting wage growth than the unemployment rate itself. In specifications of models explaining wage inflation, it has been shown that when the vacancy rate or quits rate are included in the equation, their impact often exceeds that of unemployment - especially with a lag (4 to 8 quarters).

In other words, labour demand indicators (vacancies, quits) provide very valuable information on future wage and inflation developments. Summers and Domash warned in 2022 that the then extreme readings of these indicators implied a very tight labor market and would push up wages and inflation, which indeed proved to be the case.

The recently released research by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York came to a similar conclusion. It identified job separations and the adjusted vacancy rate per job seeker as the two best correlated metrics with wage growth across a wide range of labor market indicators. These two indicators (voluntary separations and job openings per job seeker) proved to be the strongest predictors of wage inflation.

Thus, for the Fed, the JOLTS provide an important complementary picture: while the official unemployment rate has remained low and relatively stable (around 3.5%-3.8%) for most of 2023-2024, substantial changes in the balance between labor supply and demand have been taking place beneath the surface, according to the JOLTS. A decline in vacancies from extremes, a decline in voluntary separations, and a modest increase in layoffs are all factors mitigating inflationary pressures. And indeed, inflation in the U.S. has been gradually easing toward the 2% target through 2025.

Unemployment trends in the US from 2023 (1M)

But it has to be said that this is a fine line: the Fed wants a "soft landing" - to tame inflation without sharply rising unemployment. The JOLTS data is reassuring in this regard, in that the overheating has diminished, but it also begins to warn of the opposite risk. If hiring stays this low for too long and layoffs continue to rise, the unemployment rate could run up faster than desired. The Fed therefore needs to respond to waning inflationary pressures by cutting rates, but at the same time not too aggressively while inflation is above target, lest any re-acceleration in wages (or other price pressures) get to the wrong side of the ledger.

Implications for investors and the stock market

JOLTS indicators are not just the domain of economists and central bankers. They have also come to the forefront of investors' minds in the stock and bond markets in recent years, as they provide clues as to how close or far the Fed is from tightening or easing policy. The rule of thumb is that "good news can be bad news for the market" and vice versa - in a context where inflation and the Fed's response is the main concern.

For example, if the JOLTS shows an unexpected increase in job openings (a stronger labor market, potentially inflationary), investors worry that the Fed could respond with a hawkish approach (i.e., higher rates or fewer rate cuts). This typically leads to higher bond yields and downward pressure on equity prices, especially rate-sensitive growth titles. Conversely, a surprising cooling of the labour market (fewer job openings, lower quits rate, more layoffs) can please markets as it signals a moderation in inflation and hence an earlier easing of Fed policy. The result tends to be rising stocks and falling bond yields. However, this pattern is not absolute, as an extreme deterioration in the labour market would in turn trigger fears of a recession.

In December 2025, the situation was particularly interesting. The JOLTS for October came out just before the Fed's rate decision, which we will see tonight. The number of job openings was higher than expected (7.67m vs estimates of ~7.15m) thanks to the aforementioned jump in September and a modest October increase. This did temper the market's euphoria a bit as it suggested that the Fed may not be able to be as accommodative as investors had hoped.

JOLTS data from 2020 (1M)

The S&P 500 index responded with only a slight decline yesterday. The tech-heavy Nasdaq even gained slightly (+0.13%), while the Dow Jones lost slightly. Overall, the market seemed to be rather waiting. Some analysts judged that these numbers would make the Fed less dovish than expected: "It looks like the market is now pricing in a slightly less accommodative Fed because of the vacancies," said Jeff Schulze of ClearBridge Investments. Yet the market still believed the December rate cut would happen (~87% chance) and rather shifted expectations going forward. The likelihood that the Fed will take a pause after this cut has increased. In other words, the JOLTS data reinforced to investors that the Fed may ease the market now (which was already priced in), but further easing may come more slowly if the labor market performs relatively well.

The history of the past two years shows several similar episodes where JOLTS data moved markets significantly. For example, when the number of job openings first began to fall from record highs in mid-2022, the stock market welcomed it - because it meant that inflationary pressures could ease and the Fed would not have to tighten rates. Conversely, in the spring of 2023, when it became clear that the decline in vacancies had stopped and there were still around 9-10 million vacancies remaining, markets nervously looked to the Fed to hold rates higher for longer. In 2024, any significant deviation of JOLTS from expectations triggered immediate movements in yields and indices. JOLTS became almost as closely watched a report as the traditional monthly unemployment statistics.

Conclusion

The JOLTS report has established itself as one of the key indicators of the health of the US labour market and an indicator of future inflationary pressures. The latest data from the end of 2025 presents a mixed but reassuring picture at its core: the labor market has come off the covide shock but is not yet signaling a free fall. Job openings have fallen from extremes and now roughly match the number of unemployed - labor supply and demand are more in balance than they were a year or two ago. The voluntary quit rate has fallen to levels last seen nearly a decade ago, easing upward pressure on wages. However, recruitment rates are also very low, reflecting the caution of firms in the face of economic uncertainties. The Fed may read this data positively and cut rates.

Occidental entered Q3 2025 at a decisive moment in its multi-year transformation, and the latest results confirm a business that is gaining strength across all operating lines. Production exceeded management’s own guidance, operating cash flow moved higher, and debt reduction accelerated for the fourth consecutive quarter. The company also executed one of its most meaningful strategic pivots in recent years by moving forward with the divestiture of OxyChem, a shift designed to concentrate capital on oil, gas and emerging low-carbon technologies — areas that now form the backbone of its long-term competitiveness.

Taken together, the quarter paints a picture of a company that has regained operational clarity and financial discipline. Occidental is not only generating solid free cash flow at current commodity prices, but is also rebuilding balance-sheet flexibility at a speed that could soon allow for a materially larger capital-return program. With debt down by more than a billion dollars in just three months, the company is steadily approaching a new phase of the cycle — one in which strategic reinvestment and shareholder distributions can grow in tandem.

How was the last quarter?

Occidental $OXY entered the third quarter of 2025 in very good shape and the results ended up exceeding most expectations, especially at the level of operations and cash flow. The company reported operating cash flow and operating cash flow of $2.8 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively, before working capital changes, signaling robust performance of key upstream assets as well as continued investment discipline. Capex reached $1.8 billion, and with $39 million of contributions from non-controlling interests, the company generated $1.5 billion of free cash flow before working capital - the resulting FCF thus confirmed Occidental's ability to generate cash even in an environment of relatively stable but not extremely high commodity prices.

The operating side was also very strong. Global production averaged 1,465 Mboed, beating the high end of guidance. Permian remains the dominant pillar of the business with an average production of 800 Mboed, while Rockies & Other Domestic brought in 288 Mboed, Gulf of America 139 Mboed and the International segment 238 Mboed. It was the combination of higher production volumes and slightly better pricing that helped the Oil & Gas segment to a pretax profit of $1.3 billion. Realized oil prices rose 2% to $64.78/bbl, while domestic realized gas prices strengthened 11% to $1.48/Mcf. A persistent headwind was weaker NGL prices, which fell 5% quarter-on-quarter.

Midstream and marketing also beat guidance, although they posted lower earnings than in the previous quarter due to lower Waha-Gulf spreads and higher costs associated with increasing activity in low-carbon projects. Pre-tax profit was $93 million and WES equity income was $156 million. On the other hand, OxyChem was a weak spot, with earnings falling to $197 million due to weaker prices and volumes across the portfolio, albeit partially offset by lower input costs.

At the overall profitability level, the firm reported net income of $661 million ($0.65 per share) and adjusted earnings of $649 million ($0.64 per share). Occidental also continued its aggressive deleveraging, paying down $1.3 billion in the quarter and pushing total debt to $20.8 billion. This move, along with the sale of OxyChem, which management called a transformational milestone, further strengthens financial flexibility and allows the company to increase returns to shareholders.

• Full presentation with results.

CEO commentary

CEO Vicki Hollub highlighted that the third quarter is a testament to the exceptional operating performance, disciplined investments and strength of the upstream portfolio. She said Occidental outperformed targets in both the oil and gas segments while also outperforming in midstream and marketing. A key point is The sale of OxyChemwhich provides the company with capital to further reduce debt, strengthen returns to shareholders and accelerate investment in its highest-return segments. This confirms management's strategic shift towards a company focused primarily on upstream, complemented by low-carbon technologies capable of delivering a steady stream of new opportunities.

Outlook

Occidental enters the next quarters with a resilient production base, relatively stable price realizations and strong capital discipline. Management expects core upstream to continue to be a key source of cash flow growth, supported by efficiencies at Permian as well as continued stability in international assets. The weaker environment in petrochemicals should remain transitory, while midstream will be more sensitive to price spread structures, but still contributing stable results continuing to be complemented by WES dividends.

The company also reaffirms its long-term priority to reduce debt - with room to continue to gradually shift capital allocations towards share buybacks and dividend increases once the $20.8bn debt target is reached. Strategically, Occidental will continue to focus on diversifying its upstream portfolio and developing low-carbon solutions, including DAC projects, which Hollub also highlighted.

Long-term results

Occidental's long-term financial performance confirms the cyclical nature of the oil sector, but also demonstrates the company's ability to offset volatility through cost management and portfolio optimization. Revenue in 2024 was $27.1 billion, down 4.35% year-on-year, following a weaker 2023, when revenue fell 21.85%. However, these results reflect lower oil prices and normalisation after an exceptionally strong year in 2022, when Occidental increased revenues by almost 40%. The main changes were also reflected in margins, with gross profit of $9.6 billion in 2024 virtually flat, indicating successful cost control even with lower commodity prices.

Operating profit fell to $6 billion, down 8% year-on-year, while net profit fell 35% to $3 billion. The results thus remain well below the extremely strong levels of 2022, when net profit exceeded $13 billion. EBITDA fell to $12.7 billion in 2024, a 12% decline, but still a solid figure that gives the company comfort in managing debt. The EPS movement follows the movement in net income - $2.44 per share in 2024 implies a 37% year-on-year decline, but these are figures fully explained by the energy price cycle.

Long-term results thus confirm that Occidental, while not immune to the commodity price downturn, can maintain a healthy balance sheet, high levels of operating cash flow and reduce debt in a cyclical environment, which remains a key strategic objective.

News

The most significant event of the quarter was the announced sale of the OxyChem division, which management describes as a major step in the company's transformation. This transaction will allow the company to further strengthen its balance sheet, accelerate debt repayment and better direct capital to the highest return segments, primarily upstream and low-carbon technologies. Occidental has also continued its extensive deleveraging program, repaying $1.3 billion during Q3 2025 alone, a significant step toward its strategic goal of reducing debt to levels that enable greater shareholder returns. The company also highlighted growing activity in low-carbon projects, which translated into higher costs in the midstream and marketing segments.

Shareholding structure

Occidental has a highly concentrated shareholder structure, with Berkshire Hathaway dominating with nearly 27% of all shares, and has long supported the company's strategy of focusing on upstream, cash returns and disciplined investment. The institution holds over 51% of all shares and more than 70% of the free float, indicating high interest from professional investors. The largest institutional shareholders include Vanguard Group (9.05%), Dodge & Cox (8.11%) and BlackRock (5.02%). In total, more than 1,500 institutions hold Occidental stock, confirming the company's firm footing in the portfolios of long-term investors.

Analysts' expectations

Shares of Occidental Petroleum have come under pressure in recent months due to weakening oil prices and waning confidence across the energy sector. The title now trades at roughly $41 per share, marking a roughly 20 percent decline over the past twelve months, at a time when earnings outlooks have been gradually lowered. Still, some analysts expect some room for growth, backed by solid margins, gradual deleveraging and a disciplined approach to investment. At the same time, Occidental is expanding its carbon capture business through its 1PointFive subsidiary and continuing its long-term efforts to strengthen its balance sheet, showing a desire to balance its traditional oil business with new opportunities in low-carbon technologies.

Wall Street estimates suggest a more moderate outlookreflecting investors' overall caution towards energy titles. The average analyst price target of around $51 implies roughly 20 percent potential over the next twelve months, although the range of projections is wide - from $38 to $63. At the same time, the consensus indicates that Occidental remains more of a defensive headline than a growth story, as revenues are expected to decline slightly through 2027, operating margins are expected to stagnate, and valuations are below long-term averages. According to models based on analyst estimates, the stock could reach about $43 in 2027, implying only a minimal annual return. For investors, this underscores the company's character as a stable energy player focused on cash, dividends and debt reduction, not dynamic growth.

Fair Price

CVS Health $CVS showed investors solid work on turning the company around — for the fourth time this year it raised its profit and revenue outlook for 2025 and confirmed that the consolidation efforts of new CEO David Joyner are delivering results. Earnings per share are expected to reach 6.60–6.70 USD, which is slightly above consensus, and revenue is expected to exceed 400 billion USD, i.e., more than anticipated.

The problem arises when looking into 2026. The revenue outlook of “at least 400 billion USD” is notably below analysts' estimate (418 billion USD), which reminded investors that besides pharmacy and Aetna insurance the company still faces elevated costs for healthcare services for patients in government programs. Nevertheless, the earnings outlook of 7–7.20 USD per share keeps pace with the market, suggesting management believes margins are stabilizing.

CVS thus stands at an interesting point: the current year looks better than the market expected, but the question is the growth rate after 2025. Do you have $CVS in your portfolio? How do you view the company?

Microsoft has unveiled one of its most ambitious investment rounds to date, committing 23 billion dollars to accelerate its AI footprint worldwide — with India emerging as the crown jewel of this plan. Satya Nadella now positions the country not merely as a major market, but as the future backbone of Microsoft’s global compute capacity. In a world where demand for AI infrastructure outpaces supply, the company is moving to secure long-term dominance.

But the strategy radiates far beyond Asia. Alongside the Indian mega-cluster, Microsoft is expanding Canadian data centers, strengthening AI-native security systems and launching new cloud regions across Europe and the Middle East. The message is unmistakable: the company aims to weave a planet-scale network capable of absorbing the explosive growth of AI workloads for years to come.

India as a future AI superhub

The $17.5 billion investment represents Microsoft's largest-ever Asian $MSFTproject . The company wants to build several new data centers in India, boost capacity Azure and secure a head start in a region where demand for AI computing is expected to grow at one of the fastest rates. The first new centre is due to be launched in mid-2026, kicking off a transformation that could bring India closer to becoming a tech superpower.

This investment builds on an earlier $3 billion plan and gives Microsoft the opportunity to occupy the space before Amazon $AMZN or Google $GOOGdo the same . In a dynamic economy where AI adoption is spreading at a pace that has surpassed analysts' expectations, this is a move that could determine the balance of power for the next decade.

Canada strengthens its role as a research and security hub

Together with an Indian project Microsoft also announced an expansion in Canada, where it will invest more than C$7.5 billion over two years. The new capabilities are expected to be available in the second half of 2026 and will complement the previously announced infrastructure framework, which will reach nearly C$19 billion by 2027.

Microsoft is expanding here:

• Azure on-premises cloud for regulated institutions
• a collaboration with AI startup Cohere, whose models will be available on Azure
• and most importantly, a new Threat Intelligence Hubto enhance cybersecurity, AI forensics research and collaboration with the Canadian government

As a result, Canada will become one of the major North American hubs in AI security - a segment that is as crucial as the data centres themselves.

Microsoft's global AI roadmap is filling up fast

Within months, Microsoft announced billions of dollars of investment in:

• Portugal
• United Arab Emirates
• India
• Canada

This rapid succession of decisions shows that the company is responding to the dramatically increasing demand for AI computing power. At the same time, Microsoft acknowledges that Azure capacity will be scarce until at least 2026. In the last fiscal quarter alone, the company spent a record $35 billion in capital expenditures - and warns that it will grow even more aggressively in 2026.

Why Microsoft is acting so quickly

The main motivation is to keep pace in the race for AI markets, which today are decided by who can offer the most available capacity. Big Tech is experiencing an era of record valuations, but also growing pressure from investors who expect tangible results. Data centers are the most tangible pillar on which the entire AI economy stands today - without them, it would be impossible to train models, run cloud services, or support generative AI for enterprises.

Moreover, Microsoft faces competition:

• AWS, which is investing in its own chips and datacenters
• Google, which is significantly bolstering its Cloud TPU roadmap
• and younger players led by competitors focused on training models

Impact by 2030: A network that can change the dynamics of the AI market

If Microsoft actually completes all the announced projects, it will have a unique advantage by 2030. India would become Asia's largest Azure hub, Canada a major base for AI security and research, and European and Middle Eastern projects would fill strategic regions needed for global distribution of computing power.

By then, Microsoft may have a similar dominance in AI infrastructure as Google had in search fifteen years ago - one that competitors are struggling to catch up to.

The risks and weaknesses of Microsoft's AI expansion

While Microsoft's investment looks monumental, and the company is one of the few actively building global infrastructure on such a large scale today, there are factors that could slow the pace of expansion. The first is the enormous capital intensity of the entire project. Microsoft is already reporting a record CAPEX of over $35 billion for the quarter and announcing further growth, which may weigh on cash flow and sensitively set investor expectations in the long run. For hyperscalers, however, the return on investment in datacenters is a long haul - the results take years to come, and that's only if demand doesn't drop.

Another weakness is the limits in supply chains. The AI boom has caused a global shortage of GPUs, network cards, fibre optic jumpers and transformers for power grids. Microsoft can invest tens of billions, but without enough chips, electricity and materials, construction will slow. The company itself points out that Azure's capacity will be stretched until at least 2026 - suggesting demand outstrips supply by multiples.

The energy intensity of AI datacenters is also a significant risk. Each new Azure region requires massive transmission reinforcements, infrastructure modifications, and often negotiations with local regulators. These processes are slow and often drag on for years. At the same time, regulatory pressures can emerge as governments around the world begin to address how large an environmental and energy footprint AI infrastructure will leave.

Tech Insight: How Microsoft is building next-generation AI infrastructure

Behind the investments in India, Canada and other regions are not just traditional data centers, but a whole new generation of AI infrastructure designed to train and run giant models. Microsoft is building so-called hyperscale clusters with hundreds of thousands of GPUs that connect with extremely fast Ethernet and InfiniBand data networks - the technology needed to train models the size of GPT-4.1, Gemini or Claude. The computational core of these clusters today consists mainly of Nvidia H100 a H200but increasingly, custom chips are also expected to play a role Maia 100 for training and Cobalt 100 for inference.

The power consumption of these centres is measured in the hundreds of megawatts - comparable to a small city. That's why Microsoft is investing not only in data buildings, but also in power infrastructure, transformers, cooling and optimized modular systems. Modern Azure datacenters use extensive liquid cooling systems to keep GPU clusters running, and are also experimenting with new types of server racks designed specifically for AI.

Optimising data links is also an important part of the strategy. Minimal latency between GPUs is essential for training large models. For this reason, Microsoft is investing in the design of "dragonfly+" and "fat tree" network structures that reduce the risk of network congestion. At the same time, it is strengthening its own software layer - Microsoft DeepSpeed - to improve the efficiency of training large models and reduce their computational complexity.

When these elements come together, the result is an infrastructure that is unmatched by conventional cloud datacenters. These are extremely specialized units where a single training cluster can cost over a billion dollars and take years to build. Microsoft is now building this infrastructure in multiple countries simultaneously, a pace that is historically unprecedented from a technology perspective.

American infrastructure is entering a new era of expansion, and one of its clearest signals is the newly approved multibillion-dollar framework for transportation projects in Seattle. Beneath the surface, this marks a moment that could redefine not only regional mobility, but also the competitive landscape for companies operating in transportation engineering. The billion-dollar Sound Transit MATOC framework unlocks access to a capital program exceeding 60 billion dollars — one of the largest infrastructure plans currently underway in the United States. The move highlights not just the scale of investment, but also the priorities shaping U.S. transportation policy: resilience, sustainability, and the modernization of systems whose technical complexity is rising rapidly.

From an investor’s perspective, contracts of this nature are far more than administrative procedures. They function as indicators of trust, technological capability, and the ability to participate in multi-decade urban transformation. As U.S. infrastructure moves toward long-cycle capital programs, participation in MATOC frameworks becomes one of the strongest predictors of future awards and revenue growth for engineering firms.

Top Points

• Framework contract has a ceiling $1 billion and covers a period of 5-7 years.
• It is part of a gigantic $60 billion modernization program of public transportation in the Seattle area.
• The projects include light-rail expansion, system resiliency, digitization, climate resiliency and infrastructure repair.
• Selection into the MATOC framework is a ticket to dozens of high-tech subcontracts.
• The Seattle region is one of the fastest growing transportation markets in the U.S. and serves as a model for other U.S. cities.

Why MATOC is critical to Parsons $PSN and what the firm gains

Parsons' selection to the billion-dollar MATOC Sound Transit framework is not just another contract in a long list of engineering projects. It's an acknowledgement that the firm is among the few entities that can design and integrate the most complex transportation systems in the U.S. MATOC is the framework that Sound Transit uses to procure dozens of separate projects under its $60 billion public transportation development program. By earning a spot among the major design and engineering contractors, Parsons opens up access to work on expanding the light-rail network, digitizing operations, enhancing climate-resilient infrastructure, and upgrading existing transit hubs.

For Parsons, this means two key things: A steady flow of high-margin design work a a strong position in one of the most dynamic transportation markets in the U.S.. In addition, MATOC acts as a multiplier for future opportunities - the firm behind the design of lines, stations or control systems is very often involved in other phases of the project, from construction supervision to technology integration. In an environment where the U.S. is launching the largest infrastructure investment in decades, this is a strategically significant input that can determine Parsons' growth for many years to come.

• Sound Transit announced that Parsons has been awarded a place on the billion-dollar framework MATOC - which means access to contracts with an overall cap of $1 billion over the period 5-7 years. This is not a guaranteed amount, but historically, companies participating in similar frameworks have been able to 10-25% of the total volumewhich would mean potential revenue for Parsons in the range of USD 100-250 million spread over several years.

What is the significance of a billion-dollar MATOC?

At the heart of the framework contract is the design and technical preparation of key infrastructure - lines, bridges, electrification, stations and digital control systems. In transport projects, the design phase is of particular value because the design firm is very often also involved in supervision, systems integration and long-term modernisation phases. This means that input into the MATOC framework can deliver much more than task orders alone. It is the start of a long-term technology partnership that evolves as the region increases the capacity of its transport network.

Another micro element is the structure of the projects: Sound Transit is expanding light rail, upgrading existing lines, and investing massively in climate-resilient infrastructure.

Strategic significance: why Seattle is becoming America's mobility lab

Pacific Northwest region faces challenges that are increasingly common in the U.S.: congested roads, growing population pressure, urbanization, and climate extremes. Transportation investments here are not cosmetic fixes - they are responses to a structural problem. At the same time, Seattle is one of the most technologically advanced markets in the U.S., which means higher demand for digitized control systems, predictive maintenance, and traffic automation. Thus, selection into a program like this carries with it a reputational value-add: being present in a "model" U.S. transportation system.

Competition and market environment

The engineering and design services sector is experiencing a boom driven by the federal IIJA and IRA. However, public contracting remains extremely competitive, especially in transportation hubs such as Seattle, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Master contracts are a way for individual transit agencies to protect themselves from price shocks while gaining confidence that they will have sufficient qualified capacity.

The main competitors in such contracts tend to be:

• Jacobs $J
• AECOM $ACM
• WSP Global
• HDR
• Stantec $STN

All of these players rely on years of experience, quality references and the ability to deliver large scale projects. Once in MATOC, whoever gets the job gets access to the elite league of American engineering.

Project risks

• Slow assignment of task orderstypical of Sound Transit.
• Cost escalationwhich occurs frequently in the region (historically up to +40% on some projects).
• Political cycles and changes in city or state priorities.
• Lack of qualified engineers in the U.S., which can limit the pace of performance.
• Potential delays associated with geotechnical complications. (common with Seattle light rail - tunnels, slopes, coastal geology).

How MATOC will affect cash flow and when it will show up in the company's numbers

Framework contracts of this type have specific financial dynamics that are often misunderstood by investors looking only at the overall value of the contract. MATOC is not a one-off contract - it is a multi-year stream of design and integration work that unfolds incrementally as Sound Transit issues individual task orders. This means that the benefits don't come in leaps and bounds, but are layered into the backlog and with it the cash flow.

From Parsons' perspective, design projects have two important characteristics: they require almost no capex and most costs are variable. This creates a very clean cash-flow that can lift operating margins even when the construction part of the projects has not yet started. Historically, the first revenues from MATOC programs appear 6-12 months after signing the frameworkwith the largest volumes coming in the second and third years. This is key for investors looking for companies with a long-term predictable and stable order flow.

Comparing margins in the AEC sector and why Seattle has the potential for above-average profitability

Engineering firms are often perceived as a low-margin sector, but the reality is different for transportation projects. Design-build contracts for public agencies - especially in areas with complex geology and high technology requirements - achieve margins that vary significantly by project type.

Typical margins in the AEC sector:

• Standard design: 8-12 %
• system integration, digitisation, resiliency: 12-18 %
• high-complexity rail projects (Seattle, LA, Bay Area): 15-20 %

Seattle is one of the regions with the highest technical complexity of projects in the whole USA. Link Light Rail extensions require tunnels, bridge structures, advanced control systems and integration with legacy parts of the network. This is exactly the environment where Parsons has traditionally achieved above-average margins.

For investors, this means that the billion-dollar MATOC is not just about volumebut about the quality of revenuethat can significantly improve the profitability profile.

Pipeline of US transportation investments: why this deal comes at the best possible time

Sound Transit's billion-dollar framework doesn't win Parsons in isolation - it comes at a time when the United States is unleashing the biggest wave of transportation investment since the 1950s. IIJA (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) makes more than $1 trillion in funding available, but the reality is even more interesting: most transportation agency budgets won't be competed until 2026-2030.

Why is this important?

• Cities are just finalizing project documents
• Transportation agencies have shifting budgets due to pandemics, inflation and revisions
• federal money is released gradually and late
• competition in some segments is weakening due to lack of capacity

So Seattle is not a lone victory. It is a pilot ticket to a multi-year wave of contractsthat will come from metropolitan areas like Denver, Dallas, the Bay Area, Phoenix, Atlanta and Chicago.

Investors can thus read Sound Transit MATOC as a signal that Parsons is well positioned for the next five to 10 years.

The technology trends that are changing transportation infrastructure - and why Parsons is benefiting from them

Transportation projects are no longer just about bridge and track construction. Modern public transport operates on the principles of digital management, predictive maintenance and resilience to weather extremes. This fundamentally increases the value of companies that combine engineering with technology.

The most important trends include:

• digital twins - digital replicas of entire transport systems for traffic simulation
• ATO (automated train operation) - technology used in the world's most advanced metro projects
• cyber-resilience - defending critical infrastructure against cyber-attacks
• energy optimisation - working with energy recovery and advanced traction systems
• climate adaptation - integration of flood, earthquake and erosion resistant elements

Parsons is on the cutting edge of these trends due to its historical focus on defense systems, cybersecurity and intelligent transportation technologies. Sound Transit's MATOC contract covers these sectors - meaning that technologically advanced companies have a clear competitive advantage.

Investment scenarios

Optimistic scenario

The framework will be fully utilized, task orders will come in quickly and will be above average in size. Technical complexity of projects will increase margins and the firm will gain advantages in other regional contracts (LA Metro, RTD Denver, Bay Area Rapid Transit). Combined with the U.S. infrastructure wave, backlog will increase significantly and valuations will approach the upper range of the sector.

Potential impact on the stock: +35-50% in 12-24 months.

Realistic scenario

Contracts will be awarded incrementally and the importance of the contract will be mainly reflected in backlog, not immediately in earnings. Nevertheless, this is stable and high-quality growth that will support valuations and reduce the risk premium.

Potential impact on the stock: +15-25% over 12 months.

Pessimistic scenario

Task orders will be slow in coming, Sound Transit will face political pressures or cost escalations, and some projects will be deferred. The framework will remain strategically valuable but financially less significant.

Possible impact on the stock: stagnation or -5 to -15%.

What to take away from the article

• The billion-dollar MATOC is not a one-off contract, but a ticket to a long-term investment program.
• Seattle is one of the most ambitious transportation systems in the U.S. - participating in the program is both a prestige and a strategic advantage.
• The high technical complexity of the projects increases the engineering firms' margins.
• For investors, it is an indicator of future backlog growth, cash-flow stability and risk reduction.
• Transportation infrastructure in the US is at the beginning of the largest investment wave in decades.

Wall Street seems calm, volatility is at multi-year lows, and the S&P 500 continues to rally. But market history teaches us one thing: extremely low VIX levels often come before sharp corrections. Is this serenity a sign of strength — or just the calm before a storm?

How the VIX works

The VIX volatility index, often dubbed the fear index, measures the expected volatility of the S&P 500 stock index over the next 30 days. It is calculated from the prices of option contracts on the S&P 500 index, and therefore reflects the degree of fear or uncertainty investors have about the future direction of the market. Typically, the VIX has an inverse relationship with the S&P 500 Index.

When stocks fall sharply and fear grows among investors, VIX values rise, and conversely, when stocks rise, VIX values fall. In other words, increased volatility and nervousness in the markets will result in a higher VIX, while a calm, stable period means a low VIX. In practice, therefore, VIX levels are often interpreted as a measure of sentiment.

Values above 30 typically indicate significant market nervousness and fear, while values below 20 signal a relatively calm and optimistic environment. Historical data support this negative correlation. The daily percentage changes in the S&P 500 Index and the VIX show a strong negative correlation of around -0.7 over the long term. However, it is worth adding that on roughly 20% of trading days, both indices can move in the same direction, so this is not an absolute law). The typical long-term level of the VIX is around 17-20 (the historical average of the VIX is roughly 19.6), which helps us compare current values to the past. The more significantly the VIX is below this level, the more calm the markets are in terms of expected volatility.

Historical view

As a sentiment indicator, the VIX has played a significant role during major market cycles. In times of financial crises and panics, we typically see a sharp rise in the VIX. For example, in October 2008 (the height of the financial crisis) or March 2020 (the beginning of the pandemic panic), the VIX rose to extreme heights (above 50), reflecting the peak level of fear in the market. Such moments of maximum panic often coincided with market days when the S&P 500 index reached a local low followed by an upward reversal.

In other words, history shows that an extremely high VIX tends to be a contrarian signal of impending improvement. When fear peaks, stocks tend to have the worst behind them. Analysts point out that VIX readings above 50 are very rare (in the past two decades, the VIX has only crossed the 50 mark a few times), but each time occurred during the sharpest sell-offs when the market was nearing its bottom.

In these situations, the market values risk so highly that, paradoxically, from a long-term investor's perspective, it can be a good time to buy undervalued stocks. Conversely, in periods of exceptionally low volatility, when the VIX remains well below its long-term average, markets can become overconfident. We saw such investor sentiment in 2017, for example, when the VIX oscillated near historic lows (around 10) for most of the year, or in 2021, when the VIX held around the 15 level for a prolonged period. Unfortunately, these extended periods of calm often preceded later corrections in equity markets once a new source of uncertainty emerged.

A low VIX does not mean that markets are risk-free. Quite the contrary. Very low or abnormally low VIX readings can indicate investor complacency and potentially signal that a market decline is imminent.

Authors of this study even found that extreme VIX levels are often used by investors as a contrarian indicator for market timing. A high VIX indicates capitulation (and therefore a buying opportunity), while an unusually low VIX indicates a possible threat of a correction.

Practical examples confirm this. Without major fluctuations, 2017 ended in early February 2018 with a sudden sell-off (that's when the VIX shot up and the S&P 500 index plunged within days - an event known as the "Volmageddon"). Similarly, after a calm end to 2021, the market went into a sharp decline in early 2022, as it became clear that the persistent low volatility of the previous period did not mean an absence of risk. Inflation and monetary policy tightening gradually escalated, eventually carrying the VIX higher and the S&P 500 index headed lower. At the time, it even fell into bear market.

So history reminds us that the calm before the storm in the markets is often discernible precisely through unusually subdued volatility.

The current environment

So far, 2025 has looked good for US equities, with the S&P 500 index rising for most of the year. Although there was a minor wobble in mid-November, with a spike in uncertainty and the VIX jumping to around 30 at one point (marking a short-term spike in concerns to levels comparable to a major sell-off), the situation soon calmed down. The markets showed resilience, and despite that spike, November eventually ended more or less flat for the S&P 500, and the longer-term uptrend remained intact.

The VIX quickly returned to normal. At the beginning of December, it was around 15 points, roughly in line with the average of recent months. Such low VIX readings suggest that investors are entering the year-end relatively calm and without significant concerns. The macroeconomic environment is also contributing to this. Currently, the market is mainly focused on the upcoming meeting of the US Federal Reserve, the results of which will be known tomorrow, i.e. on 10 December, and which is expected to a 0.25 percentage point cut in interest rates.

The prospect of looser monetary policy has traditionally had a rather positive effect on equities, calming volatility. Investors believe that lower rates will boost the economy and corporate profits. Moreover, December has historically been supported by seasonal factors. The term "Santa Claus rally", which refers to the tendency of the stock market to appreciate at the end of the year (especially in the final week of December and the first two trading days of January). Statistically speaking, December tends to be a really strong month for stocks.

Over the last 35 years, the S&P 500 has averaged around +1.3% in December, one of the best months of the year. So far this year has not deviated significantly from historical trends. Equity markets are up 0.12% since the start of the last month of 2025. Barring unforeseen events, there is a decent chance that the typical year-end rally will occur.

Interestingly, even volatility has its typical behavior in December - although many investors associate the Christmas season with calm, data shows that December tends to see a slight increase in volatility. Specifically, the VIX index has historically risen slightly in December, averaging roughly +1.2% (since 1990). This is not a dramatic jump, but it does signal that even during a mostly positive December for equities, there can be minor fluctuations and uncertainty, typically in early December while awaiting Fed results, for example, or due to various adjustments to investors' portfolios before year-end.

This year, in fact, we saw one episode of increased volatility just before December (the aforementioned November VIX spike). But so far, the market has absorbed all of these fluctuations quickly and the overall VIX trend remains low. According to StoneX analysts the potential for unexpected shocks, such as geopolitical ones, is of course still in play, but as long as investors only react to any bad news with a short-term increase in nervousness followed by a return to calm, the VIX is likely to remain at generally low levels.

Outlook

What does all this mean for the future? The low VIX in early December generally supports bullish sentiment. It indicates investor confidence and willingness to buy stocks, which is supportive of continued growth in the S&P 500. The current combination of positive seasonality (anticipation of a Santa Claus rally), accommodative monetary policy (possible rate cuts) and low volatility creates conditions in which stocks could strengthen further by year-end.

Technical analysis also supports this. The situation on the charts looked promising in early December. The S&P 500 index has climbed out of the previous consolidation and broken through resistance, which, together with the aforementioned fundamental and seasonal factors, provides a basis for potential continued growth. In other words, so far it appears that the market could repeat its historical pattern and end the year on a positive note.

On the other hand, caution should be exercised. As we discussed above, too low volatility may hide the seeds of a future storm. According to this study the gradual rise in the VIX is one of the warning signs that the market may be about to take a turn for the worse. In late 2021, for example, the VIX began to rise modestly, reflecting growing uncertainty from inflation. And early 2022 actually saw a sharp decline in equities as the negative news materialized.

In the context of December 2025, then, the VIX and its impact on the S&P 500 can be summarized as follows: the currently low VIX supports continued growth in stocks and reflects investor confidence. Meanwhile, at the end of 2025, all indications are that the stock market could end the year successfully under the tutelage of a Santa Claus rally in an environment of relatively low volatility.

Airbnb entered the third quarter with a clear mission: accelerate growth while strengthening its position as one of the most profitable companies in global travel. The results show a company operating at full momentum. Revenue and bookings grew faster than expected, margins expanded to record levels, and user engagement continued to rise, powered by a strong mobile ecosystem and improved personalization. Q3 ultimately became one of the most profitable quarters in Airbnb’s history.

At the same time, Airbnb is laying the foundations for a much broader transformation. The introduction of AI-powered tools, expansion beyond traditional lodging, and early steps toward building social layers into the platform signal a long-term ambition to redefine what a travel marketplace can be. Combined with exceptionally strong free cash flow, these developments reinforce the company’s position as one of the most resilient and forward-looking players in the sector.

How was the last quarter?

Airbnb $ABNB entered the third quarter with an ambition to accelerate growth after several quarters where comparative fundamentals made it difficult to interpret developments. However, the results showed that the platform is on solid footing. Revenues of nearly $4.1 billion represent solid double-digit growth in an environment where global travel demand is gradually normalizing. Airbnb has been able to combine steady growth in bookings with a modest increase in average nightly rate, while changes in product mix - the growing importance of longer stays and a higher proportion of mobile bookings - have contributed positively to improved overall monetisation.

One of the strongest signals is the development of Gross Booking Value, i.e. total bookings, which increased by 14% year-on-year. This growth not only outpaces revenue growth, but also demonstrates that Airbnb still has significant room for expansion in key regions. The fastest growing markets were outside of North America, which posted double-digit year-over-year growth in Nights & Seats Booked. In addition to traditionally strong Europe, the situation in Asia improved significantly, where new features, localised marketing campaigns and flexible payment options are increasing penetration.

It was an exceptional period in terms of profitability. Adjusted EBITDA reached a record $2.1 billion and margins of 50% are now among the highest in the global technology sector. This confirms that Airbnb's model has enormous operating leverage: new bookings are delivering significantly higher margins than traditional OTA platforms because the fixed cost base is not growing at the same rate as transaction volume. Investments in customer support automation have also had a positive impact, with the new AI-assistant significantly reducing the demands on human operators.

The cash flow profile has also improved strongly. Free cash flow of $1.3 billion clearly shows that the company is generating capital in excess of investment needs. This provides it with high flexibility to fund growth in new verticals (Services & Experiences), potential acquisitions and when considering future capital return programs. The fact that the travel player's FCF margin is 33% is unique to the sector.

Product enhancements have also been significant. The 'Reserve Now, Pay Later' option has led to an immediate increase in bookings, particularly among younger users. Updated cancellation policies reduce barriers to booking and increase trust on both sides of the transaction. Improved mapping cues deliver higher conversion and flexible carousels allow relevant offers to be displayed outside of the original guest filter. All of this has translated into a strong rebound in organic demand.

• Full presentation with results.

Management commentary

Management (CEO Brian Chesky) emphasizes four main priorities: product improvement, expansion into new markets, broadening the offering, and deep integration of artificial intelligence. Features Reserve Now, Pay Later has significantly increased the number of bookings and will be further scaled globally. Changes to cancellation policies reduce booking barriers and improve conversion, while new mapping cues and flexible search results bring more relevant options to guests.

A strategy to diversify beyond the accommodation itself is also evident. Airbnb Experiences & Services attract not only new hosts, but also users who do not use accommodation services. This creates a new growth vertical that can change the revenue structure in the long term. At the same time, the company is moving strongly towards AI-native platformthat will personalise search, provide instant support and, in the future, allow users to plan their journey in a conversational way.

Outlook

• Revenue: USD 2.66-2.72 billion
  - Year-on-year growth 7-10 %, slight positive FX effect
• GBV: Growth low-double-digits year-on-year
  - driven by higher price level (ADRs) and a steadily increasing number of bookings
• Nights & Seats Booked: Growth mid-single-digits
  - Significantly challenging comparative base after strong Q4 2024
• Implied take-rate: YoY stable, no major changes
• Profitability: Adjusted EBITDA will be approximately flat or slightly lower year-over-year,
  as Airbnb invests in new features and development of Experiences and services.

Long-term results

Airbnb's long-term development shows the structural transformation of the platform from a pure growth player into one of the most efficient and profitable digital companies in the world. Revenues have grown at a consistent rate since 2021, reaching $11.1 billion in 2024, representing nearly 12% growth. This development is all the more remarkable given that the company has had to absorb the normalization of pandemic peak demand, tightening regulation in some major cities, and increased competitive pressure in key markets.

Meanwhile, the cost structure has improved significantly. Gross profit rose to $9.2 billion, and its growth far outpaced that of cost of sales. This confirms that both technology investments and process automation are lifting the platform's operational efficiency. Over the past few years, Airbnb has overhauled its internal infrastructure, improved antifraud systems, and deployed AI in both support and recommendation algorithms - and these steps are now delivering long-term margin improvements.

Operating profit rose to $2.55 billion in 2024, up 68% year-over-year. This result is due to a combination of savings, higher monetization of the service, a strong global brand and a shift in user behavior as they increasingly use the mobile app. EBITDA of $2.62 billion represents a significant shift from earlier years, when the company was just stabilizing its post-pandemic model and facing increased investment demands.

Today, Airbnb is a company with a very clean capital profile: reasonable debt, no significant equity investments, a stable number of shares outstanding and a high level of cash flow generated. This is a fundamental difference from traditional travel companies that carry high fixed costs in the form of property, aircraft or hotel infrastructure. Airbnb's platform model is one of the most efficient in the entire consumer sector in terms of return on capital.

News

• Global feature launch Reserve Now, Pay Laterwhich significantly boosted conversions in the US.
• Expansion of cancellation policy with a positive impact on customer experience and support utilization.
• New social features - Who's Going, Connections, direct messaging between Experiences participants.
• AI-assistant can resolve a portion of requests in seconds and reduces operator intervention by 15%.
• More than 110,000 new host requests for Experiences & Services.
• Local growth campaigns in Brazil, Korea and Japan resulted in double-digit increases in bookings.

Shareholding structure

Institutional shareholding exceeds 85%, which is typical of strongly established technology companies. The largest shareholdings are held by:

• Vanguard Group - 9.00%
• BlackRock - 7.56%
• State Street - 4.23%
• Harris Associates - 3.63%

The stable institutional base provides long-term support for the stock.

Analyst expectations

DA Davidson reaffirmed the recommendation Buy for Airbnb stock and set a price target of $155, representing nearly 27% potential upside from current levels. The analysts highlight the extremely rapid growth of Airbnb's new Services division , which was only officially launched in May 2025. The number of available services in the 84 cities tracked is up 129% since June and 81% since September, with supply already slightly outpacing Experiences. This segment is growing fastest in the US and Europe, where Services already significantly outperform Experiences.

Fair Price

Hollywood is waking up to one of the most dramatic media clashes in decades. Just days after Netflix emerged as the apparent winner of the long-running auction for Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount Skydance has detonated the narrative with an unexpected twist: a hostile takeover bid worth $108.4 billion. The offer aims to stop what was poised to become the largest acquisition in streaming history. Until now, the market had largely accepted that Netflix would secure Warner’s studios, television assets and HBO Max for roughly $72 billion — a combination that would give it unprecedented control over the entertainment landscape.

But the Paramount bid reshapes the battlefield entirely. The company is pushing to become a media powerhouse capable of competing with Netflix as well as tech giants like Apple and Amazon. At the same time, Paramount argues that Warner Bros. skewed the sale process by favouring Netflix from the beginning, unfairly disadvantaging other bidders. The political dimension is also intensifying: President Trump publicly questioned whether Netflix and Warner Bros. should be allowed to merge and hinted he may intervene. At stake is power, content ownership, and the future structure of Hollywood itself.

Paramount pulls out its biggest weapon: $108 billion and the desire to become a media hegemon

Paramount Skydance $PARA has been pushing its "all-in" strategy since September, when it sent its first unsolicited takeover bid to Warner Bros. After a series of rejections, it is now taking an aggressive tactic, offering $30 a share, more than Netflix $NFLX, whose bid values $WBD at about $28 a share. The difference could be decisive - especially considering that Paramount, backed by the Ellison dynasty fortune, is probably the only strategic player that can offer Warners a combination of capital, synergies and Hollywood roots.

Although Paramount has a turbulent history of rivalry with Disney, Universal and Warner Bros., its new management sees the deal as an opportunity to build a conglomerate with a huge catalog of IP that would include both Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. Discovery. For Netflix, on the other hand, the goal is to strengthen its own streaming business, while Paramount is looking to strengthen its entire media empire. It is this divergent motivation that is now creating the biggest strategic clash in modern Hollywood history.

Netflix is not giving up: A historic offer and an unusually high breakup fee

Netflix is sticking to its original strategy. Its offer includes a shocking breakup fee of $5.8 billion - the largest ever offered by a streaming platform. In doing so, Netflix is showing that it is prepared to risk everything to gain control of HBO, its vast film library and its historic Burbank studios. For a company that has so far grown up without its own studio and without a vast archive, this is a strategic change that fundamentally defines its future for the next 20 years.

Netflix argues that the acquisition will bring lower prices to consumers by bundling services. But critics see the opposite: the giant combination could lead to higher prices, reduced competition and the loss of thousands of jobs. Hollywood unions are also stepping in, warning that the "superstreamer" could further disrupt the entertainment industry's job market.

• Don't overlook: Netflix to acquire Warner Bros. studios and HBO Max in groundbreaking $72 billion deal

Politics enters Hollywood: Trump, the Senate and the antitrust storm

Although the acquisition is proceeding at an extraordinary pace, regulation remains the biggest hurdle. A potential Netflix + Warner Bros. conglomerate would have over 450 million subscribers, control two of the largest libraries of film and television content, and become the largest commercial player in streaming history. This immediately raised concerns on Capitol Hill.

President Trump saidthat "Netflix and Warner Bros. may have a problem with market dominance" and that he himself would have "a say in what happens". Republican Senators Darrell Issa and Mike Lee called on regulators to stop or severely limit the transaction. Hollywood thus finds itself in the midst of a political storm like the one it last experienced with the Disney-Fox merger.

Paramount vs. Netflix: two visions of the future of content collide

Beneath the surface, these are fundamentally different strategies. Paramount wants to create a traditional media conglomerate that will link two historic studios and their cinematic universes. Netflix, on the other hand, wants to use IP to expand into new areas - gaming, live streaming or merchandising.

With the giant Warner Bros. catalog, it would get an immediate head start in gaming strategy, where it is only gaining experience so far. The acquisition would also open the way for him to enter entirely new areas such as theme parks, licensed products or major film events.

Whoever wins the battle, one thing is certain: This marks the end of an era in which streaming platforms operated separately from traditional studios. Now begins an era where the lines between Hollywood and the tech world will be definitively erased.

Future scenarios: who can win the battle for Warner Bros.

Events surrounding Warner Bros. have now reached a stage where three fundamentally different scenarios are possible. Each of them would determine the shape of the Hollywood and streaming market for many years to come. The first, and simplest, is that Paramount's hostile attack succeeds. If Warner Bros. accepts a higher offer and investors push to maximize value, Paramount Skydance may indeed take control of the studio. This scenario would combine the two traditional Hollywood brands and create a conglomerate built on the old studio model - with fixed franchises, licensed content and a production structure close to what Hollywood has known for the last hundred years.

The second scenario assumes that Netflix will defend its position and eventually complete the acquisition. This would mean a cleaner, simpler and faster transaction for Warner Bros. as Netflix also offers a record breakup fee and as a global streaming platform, it understands well how to monetize content in the digital environment. Unless regulators present an insurmountable obstacle, this scenario would be the least complicated in the short term - and revolutionary for Netflix in the long term.

A third, increasingly realistic scenario is that regulation stops both transactions. The heightened political tensions, concerns about the concentration of power, and the attention the case has received on Capitol Hill could lead to Warner Bros. finding itself at an impasse: it will not be able to access either Paramount or Netflix. In that case, a spin-off of assets, a restructuring, or a search for an entirely new buyer that does not raise antitrust concerns would likely follow. This scenario is the least predictable - and the most destabilizing for investors and Hollywood as a whole.

When investors debate the fastest-growing stocks, few would expect to find a company whose success is built on a spray invented more than half a century ago. Yet this business has become one of the clearest examples of enduring value: minimal capital needs, stable demand, exceptional profitability, and a brand with longevity more typical of a financial institution than a consumer-goods manufacturer.

Its flagship product has turned into a cultural icon — and from that icon stems an investment story that resists traditional cycles. The company can sell the same item generation after generation while maintaining virtually untouched margins. Markets reward that kind of resilience with a premium valuation. Still, one question continues to follow the business: can this brand sustain its elevated multiples, or is its long-term growth ceiling drawing dangerously near?

Top points:

• Steadily growing sales in the range of 4-10% per year and an exceptionally high gross margin of over 54%.
• Free cash flow well above the level needed for reinvestment, giving the company room to reward shareholders.
• ROIC around 44%, a level surpassed by few publicly traded companies in the world.
• Very conservative balance sheet - almost no long-term debt, high liquidity, Altman Z-Score of 11.8.
• Dependence on one product despite gradual diversification - a potential weakness and strength at the same time.

Company profile: How a category-busting phenomenon is emerging

WD-40, originally known as Rocket Chemical Company, is an American manufacturer of household and multi-purpose products, including its signature WD-40 brand, as well as 3-In-One Oil, Lava, Spot Shot, X-14, Carpet Fresh, GT85, 1001, Solvol, 2000 Flushes and No Vac. It is headquartered in San Diego, California.

WD-40 Company $WDFC is not based on a technological revolution, but on a capitalization logic that is difficult to replicate. Its position can only be understood when we dissect the structure of its business more deeply than as "a single spray brand".

Three pillars, three sources of competitive advantage

1. Iconic product with extraordinary loyalty - The core Multi-Use Product is a symbol of trust. People buy it reflexively - not because they compare parameters, but because they know it works. This "brand inertia" is why competitors, while they exist, are virtually no threat to market share.

2. Simple production, low costs, high margins - Raw materials are not extremely expensive, production is standardised and the product is logistically simple. This combination allows the company to generate margins at the level of technology companies - an anomaly in the consumer goods segment.

3. Diversification beyond the core product - The brand has gradually expanded its portfolio to include professional lines (Specialist), household products and specific lubricants or cleaners. These segments are growing faster than the core and increasing the resilience of the whole.

Where the business can grow fastest in the next 5 years

This business looks like a stable "one-product company" at first glance, but the reality is more complex. Beneath the surface, there are several growth vectors that can fundamentally change the trajectory of the business - and explain why the market dares to value the business at a premium multiple.

Explosion in demand for professional maintenance products

Segment Specialist is growing twice as fast as the consumer arm.
This market includes:

• Industrial maintenance sprays
• automotive lubricants
• machinery and equipment maintenance products
• cleaners and degreasers for professionals

What's the key?

• Higher unit price
• higher recurring consumption
• less price-sensitive customers

This segment has potential double sales in 5-7 years.

Pricing without losing demand

When a business gets more expensive, customers stay. This is the purest definition pricing powerthat an investor could wish for.

High loyalty makes it possible:

• revenue growth without volume expansion
• stable margins even as costs rise
• strong cash flow from year to year

Herein lies the money machine that competitors find hard to replicate.

Geographic expansion outside the U.S.

Brand penetration is low in many countries. Yet the business:

• has a global brand
• doesn't need massive R&D
• is based on simple production chemistry
• already has a functional distribution network

Latin America and Southeast Asia can bring additional tens of percent growth.

E-commerce as a new driver of margins

Online sales enable:

• Higher margins (without distributors),
• more efficient cross-sell and upsell,
• testing of new products with minimal costs.

Pricing and elasticity of demand: why it can afford to get more expensive

The power of this business is best demonstrated by one thing: when input costs rise, the company simply adjusts pricing - and demand runs away. For most consumer companies, this would lead to a visible decline in volumes, but here historical experience shows that customers react only minimally. This is a typical example of a product that people buy because "it works" and they have a good long-term experience with it.

In practice, this means that the firm has very low price elasticity. A rise in price of a few percent will usually translate directly into sales and margins, not a drop in volume sold. This is one of the reasons why it can grow profits faster than sales - part of the growth is purely a result of the ability to pass on higher costs to end prices. There is a limit, of course: in a severe recessionary environment, or with the aggressive emergence of cheap private labels, elasticity could increase. So far, however, history shows that brand is above price - customers are more concerned with having the product on hand than a few dollars higher price.

Management

The strength of this business rests not only on the brand, but also on exceptionally stable management. The WD-40 Company's management has long been seen as one of the most disciplined in the entire consumer sector. The company relies on consistency, low management turnover and clear strategic direction.

CEO: Steve Brass

Steve Brass has been the CEO and President of WD-40 Company since 2022. He joined the company in 2019 as Chief Operating Officer, so he is familiar with the internal processes and global distribution infrastructure.

What's important to investors:

• Prior to joining WD-40, he spent more than 28 years at SC Johnsonone of the largest players in the consumer products industry.
• He has deep experience with building global brandspricing power and distribution in the US, Europe, Asia and Latin America.
• At SC Johnson, he was responsible for the growth of a number of brands that worked similarly to WD-40 - low product complexity but high margins due to the strength of the brand.
• Brass is a proponent of the "moat first, growth second" philosophy - protect the core, strengthen the brand, and add growth incrementally through new regions and professional products.

Analyst expectations

DA Davidson reiterated a Buyrating and $300 price target on WD-40 stock after its analysts met with the company's senior management. The stock is now trading around $195, implying a potential upside of about 54% to the target. According to analysts, this is a "high-quality best-of-breed story" that still has multi-source potential for both revenue growth and further expansion of its already strong gross margins. These factors should support steady profit growth over the long term in an environment where the company faces very limited competition, according to DA Davidson.

InvestingPro data confirms that WD-40 maintains an impressive gross margin of over 55% and has increased revenue by nearly 5 %. Despite this strength, the stock has fallen since its 52-week high by 31 % and are trading at around 29 times earningswhich is significantly lower than the peak 43 times in May 2025. the lowest relative level since 2011with the PEG ratio at 0,94 suggests that growth prospects are sufficiently strong relative to the current price.

DA Davidson therefore views the current valuation as an attractive buying opportunity. Its target price of $300 is based on a valuation equivalent to 45 times estimated earnings for fiscal year 2027.. The meeting with management representatives - CEO Steve Brass, CFO Sara Hyzer and VP of Investor Relations Wendy Kelley - reinforced analysts' confidence in the company's medium-term growth profile, according to the research report.

The positive outlook is supported by the latest fiscal fourth-quarter 2025 results, which exceeded Wall Street's expectations. Earnings per share came in at $1.56 versus the forecast $1.26 and revenue was $163.5 million, also above estimates. WD-40 increased sales by approximately 5% year-over-year and saw further improvement in gross margins and acceleration in earnings growth. As a result, analysts at DA Davidson reaffirmed their "Buy" recommendation and view the company's continued improvement in profitability as a key argument for a long-term positive outlook.

Market outlook and future demand: why this 'boring' category still has room to grow

The company's business is based on a simple fact: the world will continue to need to lubricate, loosen, clean and maintain everything from domestic locks to industrial lines in the decades to come. The global market for lubricants and maintenance products is huge - various estimates place it somewhere between $150 billion and $190 billion a year - and while it's not growing at an explosive rate, it's hovering around 3-4% a year over the long term. For a company that maintains a strong brand and above-average margins in this space, it's an ideal environment: it doesn't need "hype", it needs steady, broad-based demand.

The structure of the end markets is also important. Part of the business is based on the household, DIY segments and small workshops, where brand recognition and availability on the shelves of hobby markets or e-shops play a role. Another large block consists of industrial applications, maintenance of machinery and equipment, automotive or generally MRO (maintenance, repair & operations) in factories and plants. Analyses of the MRO market show that industrial maintenance spending is expected to grow at a rate close to 8% per year until 2030, mainly due to digitalisation and pressure to reduce downtime. This is an environment in which the professional line of maintenance products - an area where companies target higher margins - can benefit from the "more maintenance, less replacement" trend in the long term.

Another layer of the story lies in the home and construction segment. Long-term studies of home renovation and maintenance show that household spending on home repairs and improvements in the U.S. has been steadily increasing, fueled by an aging housing stock, higher home prices, and pressure to improve energy efficiency. Any trend toward "keep, don't throw away" plays into the hands of businesses - from renovating older homes to extending the life of equipment in small businesses. Add to that the brand's gradual penetration of markets in Latin America, Asia, and other regions where penetration is still lower than in the U.S. or Western Europe, and you have a combination of moderate but very broad-based growth that can accumulate over many years.

Financial performance

If there is one company that defies the idea that attractive returns cannot be achieved without high growth, it is this one.

The year 2025 showed a typical trend:

• Revenue grew by less than 5%.
• gross profit grew faster than sales
• operating margins remained high
• EPS strengthened by more than 30% mainly due to margins and stable share count

This dynamic shows that profit growth is not dependent on revenue growth - a key advantage for a company that has limits to expansion.

A look at the numbers confirms several key qualities:

• Stability - variability in results is minimal.
• Margin leverage - lower sales growth leads to faster profit growth.
• Low investment requirements - capital expenditure is small relative to cash flow.
• Debt reduction and equity growth support long-term sustainability.

All of this points to a model that does not try to outperform the market, but to outperform it with stability.

Valuation: quality has a price, the question is whether it is too high

High multiples are not new to this company. The market is willing to pay a premium because it knows that this is an extremely efficient company without cyclical volatility. Still, it is worth discussing the valuation in more detail.

Multiples:

• TTM P/E: 16,5× - Relatively reasonable.
• Forward P/E: 37× - Reflects the expected decline in earnings growth in the coming quarters.
• P/B: 9,85×which is very high for a consumer company.
• P/CF around 18×consistent with established premium brands.

Why the market tolerates high price:

• ROIC almost 45 % - the market pays for excellent capital work.
• Low bankruptcy risk - Altman Z-Score of 11.8.
• Low debt, high liquidity, stable demand.
• Brand strength comparable to Coca-Cola, Hershey or Clorox.

What could be the problem:

• Valuation assumes growth that may not come.
• Revenue momentum is declining, the company is not a growth story.
• Any slowdown could mean a revaluation multiple.

In other words, investors are buying quality, not growth.. And quality has a price - the question is whether it's too high.

Moat brands and distribution: why this is a hard business to replace

For many companies, "moat" is referred to more as marketing hyperbole. But here the competitive moat is quite concrete. The brand is so ingrained in everyday use that the product has become almost generic for the entire category. When someone needs to lubricate something or loosen a rusty joint, they often automatically reach for this product without thinking about what alternatives are available. That level of habit and trust is extremely hard to break.

The second layer of the moat is distribution and relationships with retail chains and professional channels. Product is everywhere - from large hobby markets to e-tailers to small hardware stores. It's not a problem for a competitor to produce a similar spray, the problem is getting it to the same place on the shelf and convincing the customer to reach for something different than what they've been using for years. And thirdly, the simplicity of the portfolio means that the company doesn't have to spread its marketing power across dozens of brands. All of the firm's energy is concentrated in reinforcing one central name, which deepens barriers to entry in the long run. For the investor, this means that any competitive pressure is likely to be slow to materialize and the firm's position is more likely to be eroded by a structural change in the market than by a single new player.

Risks: where the story may hit

Although the firm looks undaunted, there are relevant warning signs:

1) Growth is slowing - and the valuation is built on an optimistic outlook.
2) Iconic product accounts for 60% of revenue - concentration could be a threat.
3) Cost of production pressures may gradually erode margins.
4) Broad valuations in the sector can lead to re-rating if sentiment changes.

Opportunities: real factors that can move the business higher

• Expansion strategies in emerging markets.
• Strengthening the Specialist professional range with higher unit value.
• Price increases due to exceptional customer loyalty.
• Marginal market share growth in regions where the brand is not yet fully established.

Investment scenarios

Optimistic scenario: the brand confirms its exceptional strength

Time horizon: 12-24 months
Probability: 25-30 %

What would have to happen

• The company sustains revenue growth between 7-10 %, which is well above the historical norm.
• Pricing would remain strong - even after further price increases, there would be no decline in sales volume.
• Gross margins will shift above 56%due to a better mix of professional products and more favourable input prices.
• The consumer segment will grow more slowly, but the professional segment will grow double digits.which will boost overall profitability.
• The company will accelerate expansion in Europe and Latin America, where brand penetration is still low.

What this will do to the numbers

• EPS can grow 12-15% annually.
• Free cash flow will jump to 140-160 million. USD.
• ROIC will remain above 40 %which is extremely high.
• The company may increase share buybacks - which further increases EPS.

Price target $260-300.

Realistic scenario: stable compounder, slow but sure growth

Time horizon: 12-24 months
Likelihood: 50-55 %

What would have to happen

• Revenue grows 4-6 %, which is consistent with the company's historical norm.
• Gross margins remain stable between 53-54 %.
• The professional segment will grow solidly, but not explosively.
• The consumer market will remain strong thanks to customer loyalty.
• Chemical input inflation will be moderate.

What this will do to the numbers

• EPS will grow 6-8%.
• Free cash flow oscillates around 120-135 million. USD.
• ROIC will remain between 35-40%.

How will the market react

The market will value the company as a classic consumer goods producer with a high-quality brand but without significant growth. This means. 30-35×. Price target of USD 220-250.

Pessimistic scenario: Costs grow faster than prices

Time horizon: 12-24 months
Probability: 15-20 %

What would have to happen

• Raw material prices (lubricants, oils, additives, metal packaging) start to rise due to commodity markets.
• Company will not be able to immediately reflect new costs in prices - 2-3 quarter delay.
• Consumer segment will slow down due to weaker US consumption.
• Professional segment will become more competitive - pressure on margins.

What this will do to the numbers

• Gross margin will drop to 49-51 %.
• EPS will fall by 10-15%.
• Free cash flow will drop to 90-100 mil. USD 100-100.

How will the market react

The market begins to value the company not as a "growth premium" but as a a classic defensive consumer product. This means a significant drop in valuation. 22-26×. Price target $160-190.

What to take away from the article

• The company stands on One of the strongest brands in the entire consumer sectorallowing it to maintain premium prices over the long term without losing demand.
• Its Margins are among the highest in the industry - gross over 54%, operating over 16%, net over 13%.
• ROIC over 40% is extremely rare and confirms that every dollar invested in the business generates a very high return.
• Revenue growth is steady, not explosive - it is a quality business, not a fast-growing businesswhich shapes the expected valuation trend.
• The company generates strong free cash flowwhich allows it to combine investment, dividend increases and buybacks.
• Valuation is highwhich increases the sensitivity to any slowdown in growth or decline in margins.
• The key driver of growth is international expansion and faster scaling of the professional segment.
• The biggest risks are input costs, consumer price elasticity and the potential weakening of the premium P/E multiple.
• Investment scenarios are significantly asymmetric - upside potential is driven by growth, downside potential comes from valuation compression.
• The firm is a typical "quality compounder"which is valued in the portfolio for stability, not short-term momentum.

What do you think about the recent developments around Netflix? Are you buying the stock?

$NFLX announced the takeover of rival company $WBD, which includes, for example, the streaming platform HBO. Paradoxically, this has had a negative effect on the stock and over the past month it has fallen by approximately 10%. Netflix shares hadn’t experienced any significant decline for a long time, but now it’s finally starting to get interesting.

Perex: While Wall Street celebrates new highs, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon issues a stark warning: investors may be dangerously blind to the risks building beneath the surface. From inflation to geopolitical instability and unsustainable debt, the market’s optimism could quickly unravel. Are we sleepwalking into the next financial shock?

In a recent speech, J. Dimon warned against excessive complacency on the part of investors and politicians. He said the world is in a phase that may be far riskier than most investors acknowledge - which is why it is important to be cautious. Dimon's words are not to be taken lightly. The man has successfully led the largest US bank, $JPM, through the 2008 financial crisis and the pandemic shock of 2020, so when he warns that a combination of geopolitical risks, inflation, debt and structural problems could destabilise the global economy, it is appropriate to at least listen to him.

Dimon has openly criticized that current markets rely too heavily on a "soft landing" scenario, i.e. that central banks can tame inflation without triggering a recession. This outlook is now built into the valuations of many assets - from US stocks to bonds. Investors are calculating that the Fed will soon begin a rate-cutting cycle, inflation will remain under control, and corporate profits will begin to rise again. But Jamie Dimon reminds us that the reality is much more complicated. For example, he points to rising geopolitical tensions - be it the war in Ukraine, the strained US-China relationship, or the ongoing threat in the Middle East region. He also points out that inflation may not be as transitory as many would like, and that structural factors such as demographics, deglobalisation or environmental transformation may continue to push corporate costs upwards.

Moreover, Dimon believes that central banks, led by the US Fed, may be underestimating the real inertia of inflationary pressures. Although price growth has slowed considerably in recent months, some key components (such as utility, healthcare or insurance costs) remain high. If inflation stabilises in the 3-4% range, expectations of a rapid and deep rate cut may be misplaced. Dimon also expressed concern that excessive fiscal stimulus and extreme central bank balance sheets have created a systemic dependence on cheap money. If the economy does not receive this support for a prolonged period of time, turbulence in the markets could emerge in the form of sharp swings.

According to Dimon, inflation cannot be relied upon to remain under control permanently when the structure of the world economy is undergoing such fundamental changes. He reminds us that globalisation, which has pushed costs down for decades, is on the wane. Logistics chains are shortening, manufacturing is moving back to the West and governments are intervening in markets more often than ever before. Add to this the green transformation, which requires huge investments and increases the cost of energy production. These themes are also discussed in the recent World Economic Forum reportwhich warns that geopolitical fragmentation can raise inflationary pressures for years to come.

Inflation in the United States between 2000 and 2025

Another key issue is debt. The United States will pass the USD 33 trillion public debt threshold in 2023 (the current US debt is above USD 38 trillion). Debt servicing expenditures (i.e. interest) already constitute one of the fastest growing expenditure blocks of the federal budget. According to the Congressional Budget Office, interest spending will reach $1 trillion per year by 2030. In such an environment, any further crisis may be politically and fiscally difficult to manage. And as the a study by the Bank for International Settlements from 2023, in a high interest rate environment it is unsustainable in the long run to finance rising debt without adjustments to fiscal policy or tax increases.

The evolution of the US federal debt since 2000

From an investor perspective, it is important to understand what such a warning means for asset allocation. If a hard landing does indeed occur, valuations of current markets could be very optimistic. The S&P 500 index is currently trading above 30 times forward earnings, which historically corresponds to an environment of low inflation and stable growth. However, if a stagflationary scenario (i.e., stagnant growth + persistent inflation) were to occur, these multiples would be unsustainable.

Evolution of the S&P 500 P/E since 2011

Dimon's words can also be seen as a criticism of the system of "permanent support" of the market by central banks. Since the 2008 financial crisis, investors have become accustomed to the idea that when a downturn comes, the Fed and other central banks will immediately intervene, either by cutting rates or by massive quantitative easing. This belief was reinforced during the pandemic. However, the current environment shows that monetary policy options are not limitless. Inflation has limited the scope for intervention, and the fiscal deficit limits further budgetary stimulus. In this sense, Dimon warns that the next crisis may have a very different dynamic than previous ones, and investors should be prepared for scenarios in which central banks will not have as much room to act.

How to respond to this situation? Is it appropriate to reduce exposure to equities? Shift funds into cash, gold or government bonds?

The answer is not straightforward. It depends on the individual investor's profile, time horizon and risk tolerance. In general, however, in times of heightened uncertainty, diversification across asset classes, sector diversification and greater attention to the quality of companies in the portfolio make sense. Strong balance sheets, stable cash flows and the ability to pass costs through to prices (pricing power) are likely to be key attributes of future returns.

It is important to note, however, that Dimon's view is not entirely pessimistic, but rather cautious. He warns that the world faces perhaps the largest set of risks in decades, but he also acknowledges that the US economy is still robust at its core. Consumers are spending, the job market remains strong, and technological advances, particularly in artificial intelligence, are opening up new sources of productivity. In other words, the world is not directly plunging into a crisis today, but the possibility of one is more real than investors now acknowledge.

A similar conclusion has been reached a Harvard Business School studywhich highlighted the asymmetry in market perceptions of risk. According to this study, investors tend to underestimate the likelihood of negative scenarios in periods of low volatility, which is exactly what is happening in today's environment.

For investors, this means one thing: staying informed, being prepared for different scenarios and not getting caught up in euphoria.

After all, as the old rule goes: "The biggest risk is believing there is no risk."

Moderna’s third-quarter results paint the picture of a company still navigating the long shadow of its pandemic-era success. While demand for COVID-related products continues to fade, the company is working aggressively to build a more diverse revenue base by scaling its respiratory vaccine portfolio and slashing operational costs. The result is a quarter marked by sharply lower sales but noticeably improved operational efficiency, signaling that Moderna is gradually regaining financial stability even as headline numbers remain volatile.

At the same time, the updated full-year guidance gives investors a clearer sense of direction. Moderna is shifting from a single-product pandemic beneficiary to a multi-platform mRNA developer, with programs in flu, RSV, oncology and rare disease advancing through the pipeline. Q3 is therefore less about revenue contraction and more about whether the company can redefine its long-term identity in an increasingly competitive biotech landscape.

How was the last quarter?

The third quarter brought in revenues of $1 billion, a deep 45% year-over-year decline. The main factor was lower sales of COVID vaccines in the US, where public interest weakened again and where the 2024 comparative base included positive one-time adjustments of $140 million. However, despite the downturn, Moderna was able to benefit from the launch of the commercialisation of mNEXSPIKE, its next generation COVID vaccine, which has expanded the target population and opened up new clinical and commercial opportunities.

Gross margin improved thanks to significantly lower inventory write-downs and a reduction in unused production capacity - this was one of the most problematic areas in the previous eight quarters. Cost of goods sold declined 60% to $207 million, although it included $67 million of amortization. The biggest structural change, however, came from a dramatic reduction in R&D spending, which fell 30% year-over-year. The company continues to strictly prioritize clinical programs, with the biggest savings coming from improved trial efficiency and deferral of select projects. Nevertheless, the operating loss widened as the revenue base was too low to absorb fixed costs.

The net loss of $200 million contrasts with a modest profit last year. Nevertheless, the company closes the quarter with $6.6 billion in cash, a sufficient cushion to fund its extensive clinical infrastructure as well as further investment around seasonal respiratory vaccines. The upgraded year-end outlook confirmed a strong focus on cash discipline, with expected cash reserves raised to $7 billion.

• Full presentation with results.

CEO commentary

CEO Stéphane Bancel highlighted that the company's Q3 performance was underpinned by "strong commercial performance of its next generation COVID vaccines and deep reductions in operating costs". Bancel said Moderna "remains fully committed to operational excellence, financial discipline and progressive portfolio building beyond COVID-19". Crucially, his comments confirm that Moderna no longer plans to grow through massive investment, but through precise allocation and phased pipeline launches.

Outlook

Moderna $MRNA has narrowed full-year revenue guidance to $1.6-2.0 billion, a slight increase on the low end and a slight narrowing on the high end. The trend shows that the company is already better at estimating the seasonality of demand for COVID vaccines and the impact of international contracts. Operating costs are expected to be reduced by up to $700 million from original plans, one of the most aggressive hits to the cost base across the sector.

As a result, the expected year-end is shaping up to be more stable - the cash position should reach $6.5-7 billion. The company's capitalization is thus not at risk, which is key given that full commercialization of future vaccines (flu mRNA-1010, combination mRNA-1083 and norovirus mRNA-1403) will not come until 2026 at the earliest. The outlook thus rests on two pillars: a short-term stabilizer in COVID vaccines and a long-term driver in the form of a diversified pipeline.

Long-term results

Moderna's long-term financial trajectory shows the extreme volatility that has arisen since the end of the pandemic period. Revenues for 2024 were $3.2 billion, a decline of more than half from 2023. This follows a decline of nearly 64% in 2023, when mass demand for COVID vaccines was ending and the company did not yet have alternative revenue sources. 2022 was the last "pandemic" year with nearly $19 billion in revenues.

Cost of sales dropped drastically between 2022 and 2024, but only 2025 shows that the restructuring of production is having the desired effect. R&D costs were rising until 2023, when the company funded a massive pipeline, but they start to stagnate from 2024 onwards and drop significantly in 2025. This means only one thing: the firm has adapted to the post-pandemic reality and moved from expansion mode to disciplined optimization mode.

Net income has declined in three consecutive years, with 2024 delivering a deep loss of $4.7 billion. The loss in 2025 is smaller, showing that the combination of lower operating investment and better working capital is starting to work. EBITDA is still negative, but the reporting structure shows that the closer new vaccines get to commercial approval, the more room there is to return to positive cash flow.

News

• Moderna strengthens commercialization of COVID-19 portfolio including new mNEXSPIKE
• Company further expanded approval of RSV vaccine mRESVIA in more than 40 countries
• mRNA-1010 (seasonal influenza) to be submitted for approval in the US and EU by January 2026
• Combination vaccine mRNA-1083 awaits FDA and EMA decision
• Norovirus vaccine mRNA-1403 extends phase 3 due to lack of cases
• mRNA-1647 (CMV) has been discontinued after failure in Phase 3
• Oncology studies of mRNA-4157 and mRNA-4359 continue

Shareholding structure

Institutional investors own over 71% of the shares, a solid long-only capital base for a high volatility biotech company. Vanguard Group remains the largest shareholder with a 10.5% stake, followed by BlackRock (7.6%) and Baillie Gifford (5.6%), which holds one of the most consistent positions in Moderna since 2021. Approximately 7.2% of the stock is held by insiders, which is relatively high and demonstrates management's strong commitment to the long-term development of the company.

Analysts' expectations

The most recent available analyst commentary comes from JPMorganwhich reaffirmed a 2025 rating on Modern on November 4. Neutral and a target price $90. The analysts said the Q3 results "provide clear evidence of a disciplined transformation" but also cautioned that "the commercialization of the mRNA-1010 influenza vaccine is a key catalyst for 2026, without which valuation will remain capped by the COVID portfolio's fundamentals." JPMorgan also highlights that the arrival of combination vaccines could create a new revenue peak in 2027-2028.

Fair Price

Yesterday it was announced which companies will be added to the S&P 500. Carvana was also added to the index. The company's shares are extremely volatile and have risen by more than 8,000% since 2023, which is crazy. The company currently meets all the requirements for inclusion, but that can change quickly.

What do you think about Carvana getting into the S&P 500? Do you have shares $CVNA in your portfolio?

It seems like an interesting buy $DSY.PA, I don't yet have the software segment well represented in my portfolio.... could you please send me a counterargument on this stock? Thank you.....

Hollywood has been shaken by one of the most consequential deals in its modern history. Netflix announced a definitive agreement to acquire the studio and streaming assets of Warner Bros. Discovery in a transaction valued at $72 billion plus assumed debt. The deal unites the world’s largest streaming platform with one of the most storied studios in entertainment, handing Netflix its first major production empire complete with iconic franchises, decades of film and TV archives, and the premium HBO and HBO Max brands. For Netflix, long dependent on licensed partners and outsourced production, the acquisition marks a strategic transformation that positions it as a fully integrated entertainment giant.

According to the announced timeline, the transaction will close after Warner Bros. Discovery completes a corporate restructuring planned for summer 2026. Before the deal is finalized, WBD will spin off its Global Networks division — including CNN and a portfolio of cable channels — into a separate public company called Discovery Global. Netflix will acquire only the studio and streaming operations, the segments considered the future drivers of media growth. Market reaction was swift: WBD shares jumped 6%, while Netflix dipped nearly 3%, reflecting both enthusiasm about unlocking asset value and concerns about leverage and regulatory scrutiny.

What Netflix actually wants to buy: The content that defined an era

The deal would give Netflix $NFLX not only production capacity for the first time, but more importantly, key elements of its Hollywood identity. Warner Bros. $WBD has iconic studios in Burbank, hundreds of thousands of hours of film and television archive, and brands that generations of viewers have come to regard as cultural symbols. HBO delivers prestigious, world-class productions. Combining these assets with the distribution power of Netflix would create an unmissable media entity that would make it very difficult for competing players to compete.

And while Netflix has long built original programming from the ground up, it has never had its own extensive library of legacy content. That may be the reason the company committed to the largest acquisition in its history. For Disney or Paramount, such a combination would further escalate competitive pressure, as Netflix could redefine its distribution and licensing strategy with the newly acquired rights.

Regulation as the biggest obstacle to the whole deal

The acquisition raises immediate antitrust concerns. The combined company would have around 450 million subscribers and control two massive content libraries. Some U.S. lawmakers are already warning that such a move could harm consumers because Netflix could gain too strong a bargaining position and limit competition. Netflix, on the other hand, argues that the deal would allow it to lower prices through bargain packages and that its real competitor is YouTube, not the traditional Hollywood studios.

The fight for regulatory approval is likely to be long and complex. Paramount Skydance $PARA even sent Warner Bros. a legal letter calling the whole process unfair and tilted in Netflix's favor. Even more pointedly, some politicians have commented on the situation, openly expressing concerns about the erosion of media plurality.

Why Warner Bros. is backing down: Traditional TV is in decline

Warner Bros. has gone into selling mode at a time when the traditional television business is going through the biggest slump in history. Their cable division is reporting a 23% year-over-year drop in revenue, and the outflow of subscribers and advertising continues to accelerate. The streaming war that Netflix unleashed more than a decade ago is now hitting the original media houses hard. Selling the studio for tens of billions of dollars may be the last chance for Warner Bros. to stabilize its finances and restructure its entire portfolio.

Netflix is benefiting from this competitive weakness. The company enters the negotiations in an exceptionally strong position: it ended 2024 with more than $39 billion in revenue and a market value of over $430 billion. Its subscriber growth and financial discipline also position it as one of the best-managed media companies today.

What could the merger mean for Hollywood?

This deal would redefine the rules of the game. Netflix would cease to be an "outsider" and become a full-fledged studio giant with the ability to produce, archive and distribute content in the manner of traditional studios - only with a huge data base and algorithms that can predict viewing behaviour. A future strategy could include exclusive premieres, more aggressive licensing, and new models of collaboration with creators.

Hollywood, on the other hand, has traditionally relied on theatrical releases, and Netflix has so far refused to put movies into theaters on a larger scale. This merger may further increase tensions between filmmakers, movie studios and platforms. A scenario in which Netflix is owned by Warner Bros. would have been unimaginable just five years ago - and yet it's within reach today.

The financial structure and logic of the deal

If Netflix had indeed completed its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, it would be one of the largest media transactions of the century - and the first purchase of this magnitude in Netflix's history. Early information available suggests that negotiations are underway with a value of around $30 per share, which would value Warner Bros. at approximately $70-75 billion. In addition, Netflix is offering a record "breakup fee" of $5 billion, which Warner Bros. would receive if the deal is blocked by regulators. Such a high guarantee alone shows how serious Netflix is about the deal and that it is prepared to absorb significant regulatory risk.

From a financial standpoint, it is crucial for Netflix that it buys primarily assets, not cable networks. Warner Bros. plans to spin off CNN, TNT and TBS before the deal closes, clearing the portfolio of the traditional TV business, which is in steep decline. Netflix will thus take the most valuable things on the balance sheet - movie and TV studios, the content library, HBO Max and the rights to premium franchises. The company has ample market capitalization (over $430 billion), robust cash flow and very stable subscription revenue, allowing it to structure the deal with a combination of cash and new bonds without jeopardizing its investment-grade rating.

In practice, the acquisition would not only strengthen Netflix's ownership structure, but also dramatically change its cost base: the company would stop spending billions a year licensing outside content and become the de facto owner of one of the most valuable Hollywood libraries ever. At the same time, it would gain direct control over production and distribution, allowing it to dramatically reduce long-term operating costs and increase margins.

Why Netflix is doing it: The strategic motivations that are changing its future

The acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery would represent a major strategic change that comes at the exact moment when the streaming market is starting to slow down. Netflix has been looking for several years for additional growth engines beyond traditional subscriptions - introducing an advertising plan, expanding into the gaming business, investing in live streaming and sports. Yet the company is missing one key pillar that competitors like Disney or Paramount have: an extensive library of legacy content that has held its value for decades. Warner Bros. addresses this weakness in one fell swoop.

Another theme is independence from licensing. Netflix has historically depended on temporary licenses of other studios' movies and series, costing it billions of dollars a year while reducing the stability of its catalog. A Warner Bros. acquisition would mean permanent ownership of the hits that have defined television culture. The company would gain IP that it can adapt, expand, sell or combine across media - just as Disney does with its franchises.

In terms of the future of the streaming economy, it's also a defensive move. Netflix doesn't want to wait for competitors to complete their own consolidations and create a counterweight to its global dominance. A merger with Warner Bros. would give the company not only content, but also the prestige of a traditional movie studio, physical production capacity, experienced creative teams, and infrastructure that it would have had to build itself over years and at multiple costs.