2025 Q4 - tulosraportti
234 päivää sitten27,78 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
3,17%Tuotto/v
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | - | - | ||
| 9 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - | ||
| 18 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastoja ja ETF:iä jotka omistavat osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 4.3. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 19.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 20.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 - tulosraportti 21.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 26.2.2025 |
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
·19.10.Crazy! 3rd upward adjustment from Lollands Bank in 2026. From originally at the start of the year, 60-90 million DKK before tax to now 120-135 million DKK before tax. What is going on? Are they completely blind to numbers in the bank. Are there no requirements for directional budgets? Don't know if it is the first time in Danish banking history that a bank turns out twice as good as originally expected from the start of the year. Ok - the approx. 20 million DKK stems from the sale of BEC to Nykredit. But still - I am not entirely comfortable. Thinking that it is best for all parties (and especially the owners/shareholders), that the bank is taken over by someone whose calculator works a bit better. The bank's board of directors could appropriately start by calling SJF Bank and inviting them for coffee.
Well, when you look at the price trend in LOL this year, the bank's expectations don't seem to worry the stock market significantly. It is indeed surprising when compared to other banks. Is it because shareholders have resigned themselves to merely speculating on what SJF Bank will offer in price for LOL in connection with a takeover, and everything else is just noise in that context? It seems a bit extreme, but I must admit that I have probably fallen into that "hole" a bit, and am just passively waiting for a takeover bid. But it might be that one should buy a little extra LOL instead, even though we all(?) well know that LOL is living a bit on borrowed time.
·15.10.It is naturally completely impossible to quantify how large a part of today's drop in the Nordea share can be attributed to the information about a pause in the share buyback program. That would require an insight into every single seller's reasoning for hitting the sell button. Therefore, the following is merely my subjective assessment of the causality between the two. A result that hits expectations would, in a normal/theoretical situation, not be price-sensitive. In the current situation, where several Danish banks have upgraded their guidance over recent weeks, a confirmation that Nordea is following previously announced expectations is not sufficient for a neutral price development. To that, we can add the general turmoil that also applies to the other banks. However, in my view, this still leaves a significant share of today's drop, which is currently at approx. 6.5%, that can be explained by the announced pause in the share buyback program. Now, the temporary halt of the share buyback is not a maneuver that Nordea is doing voluntarily. So I will simply once again urge the other banks to let today's confirmation from the stock market be an inspiration ("raised index finger" sounds so aggressive): Get going with the share buyback programs wherever possible within the desired capital buffer. For medium-sized and large banks, this ought to be a matter of course. For small banks, it is a necessity to ensure the maintenance of independence. For all banks, it should be a top priority to nurture the owners' interests. Fortunately, a large part of the banks have gotten started - but there are still some cases where I think it is glaringly obvious to initiate share buyback programs - preferably in connection with the annual report for 2026. Not to bore everyone, I will limit myself to involving two: Lollands Bank and Kreditbanken. Lollands Bank's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 12.4%. A payout of 30 mio. kr. was distributed out of a profit of 90 mio. kr., i.e. approx. 33%. The dividend policy states a payout of between 25-40% of the year's profit. With a price/book value of what I estimate to be approx. 0.92 when Lollands Bank presents its accounts after Q3 2026, you have all the ingredients for a share buyback program. Add to that the fact that SJF is lurking out in the backyard... Kreditbanken's dividend policy is only to be found in the annual report, but that is probably because it is too vague to merit an independent document: "In respect of the management buffer decided by the bank at any given time, Kreditbanken's board of directors will take into account that dividend payment is part of running a local bank". Realistically, it can hardly be made much more fluffy. Kreditbanken's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 10.5%. At the same time, we remember that Kreditbanken had already at this point taken estimated losses that, measured relative to equity, were twice as large as the bank that had made the second-most provisions. In early November, Kreditbanken will initiate a very small share buyback program for employee remuneration - so we know it can be done in Aabenraa too. Authorization has been given by the general meeting to acquire own shares within a total nominal value of 10% of the bank's share capital. Come on and get started.I agree with you that the pause in the share buyback program in Nordea immediately seems to be the main reason for the extreme price reaction (now -8% for the day!). Unfortunately, I already have plenty of bank shares (e.g. Lollands Bank), but otherwise it seems to me like an obvious buying opportunity. But otherwise I completely agree with you that Lollands Bank needs to get going with a share buyback program, which seems like the only right thing to do in the situation. But Lollands Bank's board of directors does not seem so interested in looking after the interests of the (small) shareholders. The last time there was an extraordinary general meeting 5-10 years ago about the board investigating the sales options, the shareholder interest petered out. However, the voting right restriction has been removed. I wonder if that is on the advice of the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority? or is it rather SJF :). I am wondering a bit whether in practice, it is actually SJF that is inspiring the dividend policy and share buyback programs in LOL now? They don't really have any interest in making Lollands Bank shareholders happy to own LOL shares. (Kreditbanken I know nothing about, but you are probably right about that too.)- ·28.9. · MuokattuNobody wants to own Lollands Bank! Lollands Bank is underperforming the sector. Lollands Bank is therefore "cheap" Almost the only stock where you can buy 1 DKK of book value for less than 1 DKK (approx. 94 øre) The company probably serves the interests of customers and employees, but NOT the shareholders. Get in the game, Lollands Bank! You are one of the most solidly capitalized Danish banks. Lower or drop your annual dividend. AND BUY BACK YOUR OWN SHARES INSTEAD. If the share price subsequently rises, it will be harder for you to take over. And I think you'd like that. Thanks in advance!
The bank protects itself against shareholder influence through a self-co-opting representative body. Local members with very few shares receive annual fees of a few thousand kr simply to support the incumbent management. Forget any thought of value creation for the shareholders. - ·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summer
If one is employed in a listed bank, one might regularly talk about the bank's share price with colleagues. If a share buyback program comes, one can thus easily find the right time to buy without difficulty. So at least some employees (perhaps especially those with senior functions) are better off than the ordinary shareholder, who doesn't get the right time to trade served over the lunch table! Therefore, I prefer dividends over buybacks. In the insurance industry, there is too little competition. There are simply too few players after large merger waves in the last century. With that in mind, I no longer wish for bank mergers. It has been a bit of a U-turn, probably due to the actions of commercial insurance companies, which have not changed despite criticism and anger from policyholders. The considerations in the post I am commenting on here are clearly logical. But after my U-turn regarding bank mergers, I am more willing to show skepticism towards measures leading to mergers :). It is best for Denmark and most Danes if we keep a number of banks! For bank shareholders, the profit is shifted further into the future, but it will surely come, considering how strong the banks have become. Except for one (still) large bank, which was formed by a series of mergers in the last century, the banks have impressive equity. (The large bank is not progressing at the same pace as its competitors, who are thus gaining market share.)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti
234 päivää sitten27,78 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
3,17%Tuotto/v
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·19.10.Crazy! 3rd upward adjustment from Lollands Bank in 2026. From originally at the start of the year, 60-90 million DKK before tax to now 120-135 million DKK before tax. What is going on? Are they completely blind to numbers in the bank. Are there no requirements for directional budgets? Don't know if it is the first time in Danish banking history that a bank turns out twice as good as originally expected from the start of the year. Ok - the approx. 20 million DKK stems from the sale of BEC to Nykredit. But still - I am not entirely comfortable. Thinking that it is best for all parties (and especially the owners/shareholders), that the bank is taken over by someone whose calculator works a bit better. The bank's board of directors could appropriately start by calling SJF Bank and inviting them for coffee.Well, when you look at the price trend in LOL this year, the bank's expectations don't seem to worry the stock market significantly. It is indeed surprising when compared to other banks. Is it because shareholders have resigned themselves to merely speculating on what SJF Bank will offer in price for LOL in connection with a takeover, and everything else is just noise in that context? It seems a bit extreme, but I must admit that I have probably fallen into that "hole" a bit, and am just passively waiting for a takeover bid. But it might be that one should buy a little extra LOL instead, even though we all(?) well know that LOL is living a bit on borrowed time.
- ·15.10.It is naturally completely impossible to quantify how large a part of today's drop in the Nordea share can be attributed to the information about a pause in the share buyback program. That would require an insight into every single seller's reasoning for hitting the sell button. Therefore, the following is merely my subjective assessment of the causality between the two. A result that hits expectations would, in a normal/theoretical situation, not be price-sensitive. In the current situation, where several Danish banks have upgraded their guidance over recent weeks, a confirmation that Nordea is following previously announced expectations is not sufficient for a neutral price development. To that, we can add the general turmoil that also applies to the other banks. However, in my view, this still leaves a significant share of today's drop, which is currently at approx. 6.5%, that can be explained by the announced pause in the share buyback program. Now, the temporary halt of the share buyback is not a maneuver that Nordea is doing voluntarily. So I will simply once again urge the other banks to let today's confirmation from the stock market be an inspiration ("raised index finger" sounds so aggressive): Get going with the share buyback programs wherever possible within the desired capital buffer. For medium-sized and large banks, this ought to be a matter of course. For small banks, it is a necessity to ensure the maintenance of independence. For all banks, it should be a top priority to nurture the owners' interests. Fortunately, a large part of the banks have gotten started - but there are still some cases where I think it is glaringly obvious to initiate share buyback programs - preferably in connection with the annual report for 2026. Not to bore everyone, I will limit myself to involving two: Lollands Bank and Kreditbanken. Lollands Bank's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 12.4%. A payout of 30 mio. kr. was distributed out of a profit of 90 mio. kr., i.e. approx. 33%. The dividend policy states a payout of between 25-40% of the year's profit. With a price/book value of what I estimate to be approx. 0.92 when Lollands Bank presents its accounts after Q3 2026, you have all the ingredients for a share buyback program. Add to that the fact that SJF is lurking out in the backyard... Kreditbanken's dividend policy is only to be found in the annual report, but that is probably because it is too vague to merit an independent document: "In respect of the management buffer decided by the bank at any given time, Kreditbanken's board of directors will take into account that dividend payment is part of running a local bank". Realistically, it can hardly be made much more fluffy. Kreditbanken's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 10.5%. At the same time, we remember that Kreditbanken had already at this point taken estimated losses that, measured relative to equity, were twice as large as the bank that had made the second-most provisions. In early November, Kreditbanken will initiate a very small share buyback program for employee remuneration - so we know it can be done in Aabenraa too. Authorization has been given by the general meeting to acquire own shares within a total nominal value of 10% of the bank's share capital. Come on and get started.I agree with you that the pause in the share buyback program in Nordea immediately seems to be the main reason for the extreme price reaction (now -8% for the day!). Unfortunately, I already have plenty of bank shares (e.g. Lollands Bank), but otherwise it seems to me like an obvious buying opportunity. But otherwise I completely agree with you that Lollands Bank needs to get going with a share buyback program, which seems like the only right thing to do in the situation. But Lollands Bank's board of directors does not seem so interested in looking after the interests of the (small) shareholders. The last time there was an extraordinary general meeting 5-10 years ago about the board investigating the sales options, the shareholder interest petered out. However, the voting right restriction has been removed. I wonder if that is on the advice of the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority? or is it rather SJF :). I am wondering a bit whether in practice, it is actually SJF that is inspiring the dividend policy and share buyback programs in LOL now? They don't really have any interest in making Lollands Bank shareholders happy to own LOL shares. (Kreditbanken I know nothing about, but you are probably right about that too.)
- ·28.9. · MuokattuNobody wants to own Lollands Bank! Lollands Bank is underperforming the sector. Lollands Bank is therefore "cheap" Almost the only stock where you can buy 1 DKK of book value for less than 1 DKK (approx. 94 øre) The company probably serves the interests of customers and employees, but NOT the shareholders. Get in the game, Lollands Bank! You are one of the most solidly capitalized Danish banks. Lower or drop your annual dividend. AND BUY BACK YOUR OWN SHARES INSTEAD. If the share price subsequently rises, it will be harder for you to take over. And I think you'd like that. Thanks in advance!The bank protects itself against shareholder influence through a self-co-opting representative body. Local members with very few shares receive annual fees of a few thousand kr simply to support the incumbent management. Forget any thought of value creation for the shareholders.
- ·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summerIf one is employed in a listed bank, one might regularly talk about the bank's share price with colleagues. If a share buyback program comes, one can thus easily find the right time to buy without difficulty. So at least some employees (perhaps especially those with senior functions) are better off than the ordinary shareholder, who doesn't get the right time to trade served over the lunch table! Therefore, I prefer dividends over buybacks. In the insurance industry, there is too little competition. There are simply too few players after large merger waves in the last century. With that in mind, I no longer wish for bank mergers. It has been a bit of a U-turn, probably due to the actions of commercial insurance companies, which have not changed despite criticism and anger from policyholders. The considerations in the post I am commenting on here are clearly logical. But after my U-turn regarding bank mergers, I am more willing to show skepticism towards measures leading to mergers :). It is best for Denmark and most Danes if we keep a number of banks! For bank shareholders, the profit is shifted further into the future, but it will surely come, considering how strong the banks have become. Except for one (still) large bank, which was formed by a series of mergers in the last century, the banks have impressive equity. (The large bank is not progressing at the same pace as its competitors, who are thus gaining market share.)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | - | - | ||
| 9 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - | ||
| 18 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastoja ja ETF:iä jotka omistavat osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 4.3. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 19.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 20.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 - tulosraportti 21.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 26.2.2025 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti
234 päivää sittenUutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 4.3. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 19.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 20.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 - tulosraportti 21.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 - tulosraportti 26.2.2025 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
27,78 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
3,17%Tuotto/v
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·19.10.Crazy! 3rd upward adjustment from Lollands Bank in 2026. From originally at the start of the year, 60-90 million DKK before tax to now 120-135 million DKK before tax. What is going on? Are they completely blind to numbers in the bank. Are there no requirements for directional budgets? Don't know if it is the first time in Danish banking history that a bank turns out twice as good as originally expected from the start of the year. Ok - the approx. 20 million DKK stems from the sale of BEC to Nykredit. But still - I am not entirely comfortable. Thinking that it is best for all parties (and especially the owners/shareholders), that the bank is taken over by someone whose calculator works a bit better. The bank's board of directors could appropriately start by calling SJF Bank and inviting them for coffee.Well, when you look at the price trend in LOL this year, the bank's expectations don't seem to worry the stock market significantly. It is indeed surprising when compared to other banks. Is it because shareholders have resigned themselves to merely speculating on what SJF Bank will offer in price for LOL in connection with a takeover, and everything else is just noise in that context? It seems a bit extreme, but I must admit that I have probably fallen into that "hole" a bit, and am just passively waiting for a takeover bid. But it might be that one should buy a little extra LOL instead, even though we all(?) well know that LOL is living a bit on borrowed time.
- ·15.10.It is naturally completely impossible to quantify how large a part of today's drop in the Nordea share can be attributed to the information about a pause in the share buyback program. That would require an insight into every single seller's reasoning for hitting the sell button. Therefore, the following is merely my subjective assessment of the causality between the two. A result that hits expectations would, in a normal/theoretical situation, not be price-sensitive. In the current situation, where several Danish banks have upgraded their guidance over recent weeks, a confirmation that Nordea is following previously announced expectations is not sufficient for a neutral price development. To that, we can add the general turmoil that also applies to the other banks. However, in my view, this still leaves a significant share of today's drop, which is currently at approx. 6.5%, that can be explained by the announced pause in the share buyback program. Now, the temporary halt of the share buyback is not a maneuver that Nordea is doing voluntarily. So I will simply once again urge the other banks to let today's confirmation from the stock market be an inspiration ("raised index finger" sounds so aggressive): Get going with the share buyback programs wherever possible within the desired capital buffer. For medium-sized and large banks, this ought to be a matter of course. For small banks, it is a necessity to ensure the maintenance of independence. For all banks, it should be a top priority to nurture the owners' interests. Fortunately, a large part of the banks have gotten started - but there are still some cases where I think it is glaringly obvious to initiate share buyback programs - preferably in connection with the annual report for 2026. Not to bore everyone, I will limit myself to involving two: Lollands Bank and Kreditbanken. Lollands Bank's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 12.4%. A payout of 30 mio. kr. was distributed out of a profit of 90 mio. kr., i.e. approx. 33%. The dividend policy states a payout of between 25-40% of the year's profit. With a price/book value of what I estimate to be approx. 0.92 when Lollands Bank presents its accounts after Q3 2026, you have all the ingredients for a share buyback program. Add to that the fact that SJF is lurking out in the backyard... Kreditbanken's dividend policy is only to be found in the annual report, but that is probably because it is too vague to merit an independent document: "In respect of the management buffer decided by the bank at any given time, Kreditbanken's board of directors will take into account that dividend payment is part of running a local bank". Realistically, it can hardly be made much more fluffy. Kreditbanken's excess capital upon the presentation of the 2025 annual report was 10.5%. At the same time, we remember that Kreditbanken had already at this point taken estimated losses that, measured relative to equity, were twice as large as the bank that had made the second-most provisions. In early November, Kreditbanken will initiate a very small share buyback program for employee remuneration - so we know it can be done in Aabenraa too. Authorization has been given by the general meeting to acquire own shares within a total nominal value of 10% of the bank's share capital. Come on and get started.I agree with you that the pause in the share buyback program in Nordea immediately seems to be the main reason for the extreme price reaction (now -8% for the day!). Unfortunately, I already have plenty of bank shares (e.g. Lollands Bank), but otherwise it seems to me like an obvious buying opportunity. But otherwise I completely agree with you that Lollands Bank needs to get going with a share buyback program, which seems like the only right thing to do in the situation. But Lollands Bank's board of directors does not seem so interested in looking after the interests of the (small) shareholders. The last time there was an extraordinary general meeting 5-10 years ago about the board investigating the sales options, the shareholder interest petered out. However, the voting right restriction has been removed. I wonder if that is on the advice of the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority? or is it rather SJF :). I am wondering a bit whether in practice, it is actually SJF that is inspiring the dividend policy and share buyback programs in LOL now? They don't really have any interest in making Lollands Bank shareholders happy to own LOL shares. (Kreditbanken I know nothing about, but you are probably right about that too.)
- ·28.9. · MuokattuNobody wants to own Lollands Bank! Lollands Bank is underperforming the sector. Lollands Bank is therefore "cheap" Almost the only stock where you can buy 1 DKK of book value for less than 1 DKK (approx. 94 øre) The company probably serves the interests of customers and employees, but NOT the shareholders. Get in the game, Lollands Bank! You are one of the most solidly capitalized Danish banks. Lower or drop your annual dividend. AND BUY BACK YOUR OWN SHARES INSTEAD. If the share price subsequently rises, it will be harder for you to take over. And I think you'd like that. Thanks in advance!The bank protects itself against shareholder influence through a self-co-opting representative body. Local members with very few shares receive annual fees of a few thousand kr simply to support the incumbent management. Forget any thought of value creation for the shareholders.
- ·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summerIf one is employed in a listed bank, one might regularly talk about the bank's share price with colleagues. If a share buyback program comes, one can thus easily find the right time to buy without difficulty. So at least some employees (perhaps especially those with senior functions) are better off than the ordinary shareholder, who doesn't get the right time to trade served over the lunch table! Therefore, I prefer dividends over buybacks. In the insurance industry, there is too little competition. There are simply too few players after large merger waves in the last century. With that in mind, I no longer wish for bank mergers. It has been a bit of a U-turn, probably due to the actions of commercial insurance companies, which have not changed despite criticism and anger from policyholders. The considerations in the post I am commenting on here are clearly logical. But after my U-turn regarding bank mergers, I am more willing to show skepticism towards measures leading to mergers :). It is best for Denmark and most Danes if we keep a number of banks! For bank shareholders, the profit is shifted further into the future, but it will surely come, considering how strong the banks have become. Except for one (still) large bank, which was formed by a series of mergers in the last century, the banks have impressive equity. (The large bank is not progressing at the same pace as its competitors, who are thus gaining market share.)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | - | - | ||
| 9 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - | ||
| 18 | - | - | ||
| 3 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastoja ja ETF:iä jotka omistavat osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt