2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
10 päivää sitten
‧42 min
5,40 NOK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,72%Tuotto/v
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 15.7. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 29.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 11.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 11.7.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·1 päivä sittenWill STB go up to 210 or will it go down to 180. What do you think?
·3 päivää sittenMy price target for this is 120kr, below I explain why: Analysis: Storebrand is a financial company and for such companies, equity is an important input factor (the insurance part must hold regulatory capital, the banking part must hold EK behind each loan, etc.). In my opinion, the company should therefore be valued based on capital commitment (equity), the return they have (and possibly can get in the future) on this capital (return on equity), and growth opportunities (good internal reinvestment opportunities are net better than high dividends) Storebrand had approximately 76kr in EK per share at the end of Q2 2026 (adjusted for minority interests and hybrid capital). Let's say they achieve a 17% ROE on this capital indefinitely (this is their target for "cash roe" in 2028) while paying out 85% as dividends/buybacks. The remaining 15% they can reinvest at 17% ROE, which gives 15%*17%= 2.55% growth. I base this on a required rate of return of 10% and the Gordon Growth Model, which states: "fair P/B = (ROE-growth)/(required rate of return-growth)" Then the formula becomes: P/B = (17%-2.55%) / (10%-2.55%) = 1.94x The formula thus states that the company should be priced at 1.94x P/B given the assumptions I made and a 10% required rate of return. If one takes Storebrand's EK of 76kr and multiplies this by 1.94, we get 147.44 as the intrinsic value of the company (without any margin of safety). If one has a required rate of return of 12%, it becomes 116.2kr/share fair according to this model. If one buys the share today at 194 kr, one can expect a return of 8.2% given this model. I set my buying price at 120 kr as I believe this provides a good margin of safety and a high enough expected return for the risk one takes. NOTE: This is not a perfect model, and is based on my own assumptions. I welcome nuances in the comment section. Disclaimer: These are my thoughts and should NOT be seen as a recommendation, do your own Research or talk to an advisor. what I write may also be wrong.
An AI answer to Rolfkuø who uses AI The short answer: There isn't one thing that is "wrong" in your analysis – but it is based on a series of assumptions that are unusually aggressive, and the model you use (Gordon Growth on P/B) has weaknesses when applied to a conglomerate like Stb. That is why your price target ends up extremely low compared to the market. Below I will go through what is actually amiss, point by point. Main takeaway The biggest weakness in the analysis is the combination of too high assumptions about ROE, too low required rate of return, and the use of a model that does not capture Stb's actual value drivers. When you change these to more realistic levels, the Gordon model collapses – and your price target becomes artificially low. 1. The ROE assumption (17 % perpetual ROE) is extremely high Stb has historically been around 10–13 % ROE. Assuming 17 % ROE indefinitely is: • far above historical levels • far above industry average • far above what regulatory capital requirements normally allow • far above what a mature financial conglomerate can achieve without significant risk A perpetual ROE of 17 % is more typical for niche banks, tech companies, or capital-light business models, not a large Nordic financial conglomerate. This alone strictly speaking makes your model more optimistic than the market, not more conservative. 2. Payout ratio of 85 % + 17 % ROE = mathematically inconsistent You assume: • 85 % payout • 15 % reinvestment • reinvested capital yields 17 % ROE → 2.55 % perpetual growth The problem is that high ROE + high payout + high growth do not cohere in a regulated financial company. In practice: • Stb cannot grow 2.55 % perpetually with an 85 % payout without increasing risk or raising capital. • Capital regulation (Solvency II, bank regulation) limits growth when payout is so high. • The market knows this – which is why Storebrand is not valued as a "compounder company". Your model assumes a capital structure that is not possible in reality. 3. Required rate of return of 10 % is too low for a financial conglomerate The market typically uses: • 11–13 % for banks • 12–14 % for insurance companies • 13–15 % for conglomerates with regulatory capital Stb has: • interest rate risk • market risk • insurance risk • bank risk • real estate risk • regulatory capital requirement • exposure to the Norwegian economy A required rate of return of 10 % is therefore not conservative – it is low. When you increase the required rate of return to realistic levels (12–14 %), the Gordon model falls dramatically. 4. Gordon Growth Model on P/B is very sensitive and often misleading The formula: P/B = (ROE – g) / (r – g) has three problems: a) It assumes that ROE, growth, and required rate of return are constant in perpetuity This is never true for financial companies. b) It assumes that all growth comes from reinvested equity Stb also grows through: • price adjustments • capital market returns • changes in risk profile • cost improvements • capital release • changes in Solvency II buffer This breaks the model's logic. c) It assumes that P/B is the correct valuation method The market uses: • sum-of-the-parts • embedded value • solvency capital ratio • capital market sensitivity • fee-based earnings • life insurance reserves • asset management multiples The Gordon model captures none of these. Continuation in next post
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.
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.
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
10 päivää sitten
‧42 min
5,40 NOK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,72%Tuotto/v
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
Kirjaudu
- ·1 päivä sittenWill STB go up to 210 or will it go down to 180. What do you think?
- ·3 päivää sittenMy price target for this is 120kr, below I explain why: Analysis: Storebrand is a financial company and for such companies, equity is an important input factor (the insurance part must hold regulatory capital, the banking part must hold EK behind each loan, etc.). In my opinion, the company should therefore be valued based on capital commitment (equity), the return they have (and possibly can get in the future) on this capital (return on equity), and growth opportunities (good internal reinvestment opportunities are net better than high dividends) Storebrand had approximately 76kr in EK per share at the end of Q2 2026 (adjusted for minority interests and hybrid capital). Let's say they achieve a 17% ROE on this capital indefinitely (this is their target for "cash roe" in 2028) while paying out 85% as dividends/buybacks. The remaining 15% they can reinvest at 17% ROE, which gives 15%*17%= 2.55% growth. I base this on a required rate of return of 10% and the Gordon Growth Model, which states: "fair P/B = (ROE-growth)/(required rate of return-growth)" Then the formula becomes: P/B = (17%-2.55%) / (10%-2.55%) = 1.94x The formula thus states that the company should be priced at 1.94x P/B given the assumptions I made and a 10% required rate of return. If one takes Storebrand's EK of 76kr and multiplies this by 1.94, we get 147.44 as the intrinsic value of the company (without any margin of safety). If one has a required rate of return of 12%, it becomes 116.2kr/share fair according to this model. If one buys the share today at 194 kr, one can expect a return of 8.2% given this model. I set my buying price at 120 kr as I believe this provides a good margin of safety and a high enough expected return for the risk one takes. NOTE: This is not a perfect model, and is based on my own assumptions. I welcome nuances in the comment section. Disclaimer: These are my thoughts and should NOT be seen as a recommendation, do your own Research or talk to an advisor. what I write may also be wrong.An AI answer to Rolfkuø who uses AI The short answer: There isn't one thing that is "wrong" in your analysis – but it is based on a series of assumptions that are unusually aggressive, and the model you use (Gordon Growth on P/B) has weaknesses when applied to a conglomerate like Stb. That is why your price target ends up extremely low compared to the market. Below I will go through what is actually amiss, point by point. Main takeaway The biggest weakness in the analysis is the combination of too high assumptions about ROE, too low required rate of return, and the use of a model that does not capture Stb's actual value drivers. When you change these to more realistic levels, the Gordon model collapses – and your price target becomes artificially low. 1. The ROE assumption (17 % perpetual ROE) is extremely high Stb has historically been around 10–13 % ROE. Assuming 17 % ROE indefinitely is: • far above historical levels • far above industry average • far above what regulatory capital requirements normally allow • far above what a mature financial conglomerate can achieve without significant risk A perpetual ROE of 17 % is more typical for niche banks, tech companies, or capital-light business models, not a large Nordic financial conglomerate. This alone strictly speaking makes your model more optimistic than the market, not more conservative. 2. Payout ratio of 85 % + 17 % ROE = mathematically inconsistent You assume: • 85 % payout • 15 % reinvestment • reinvested capital yields 17 % ROE → 2.55 % perpetual growth The problem is that high ROE + high payout + high growth do not cohere in a regulated financial company. In practice: • Stb cannot grow 2.55 % perpetually with an 85 % payout without increasing risk or raising capital. • Capital regulation (Solvency II, bank regulation) limits growth when payout is so high. • The market knows this – which is why Storebrand is not valued as a "compounder company". Your model assumes a capital structure that is not possible in reality. 3. Required rate of return of 10 % is too low for a financial conglomerate The market typically uses: • 11–13 % for banks • 12–14 % for insurance companies • 13–15 % for conglomerates with regulatory capital Stb has: • interest rate risk • market risk • insurance risk • bank risk • real estate risk • regulatory capital requirement • exposure to the Norwegian economy A required rate of return of 10 % is therefore not conservative – it is low. When you increase the required rate of return to realistic levels (12–14 %), the Gordon model falls dramatically. 4. Gordon Growth Model on P/B is very sensitive and often misleading The formula: P/B = (ROE – g) / (r – g) has three problems: a) It assumes that ROE, growth, and required rate of return are constant in perpetuity This is never true for financial companies. b) It assumes that all growth comes from reinvested equity Stb also grows through: • price adjustments • capital market returns • changes in risk profile • cost improvements • capital release • changes in Solvency II buffer This breaks the model's logic. c) It assumes that P/B is the correct valuation method The market uses: • sum-of-the-parts • embedded value • solvency capital ratio • capital market sensitivity • fee-based earnings • life insurance reserves • asset management multiples The Gordon model captures none of these. Continuation in next post
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
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 15.7. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 29.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 11.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 11.7.2025 |
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
10 päivää sitten
‧42 min
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, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 15.7. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 29.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 11.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 11.7.2025 |
5,40 NOK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,72%Tuotto/v
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·1 päivä sittenWill STB go up to 210 or will it go down to 180. What do you think?
- ·3 päivää sittenMy price target for this is 120kr, below I explain why: Analysis: Storebrand is a financial company and for such companies, equity is an important input factor (the insurance part must hold regulatory capital, the banking part must hold EK behind each loan, etc.). In my opinion, the company should therefore be valued based on capital commitment (equity), the return they have (and possibly can get in the future) on this capital (return on equity), and growth opportunities (good internal reinvestment opportunities are net better than high dividends) Storebrand had approximately 76kr in EK per share at the end of Q2 2026 (adjusted for minority interests and hybrid capital). Let's say they achieve a 17% ROE on this capital indefinitely (this is their target for "cash roe" in 2028) while paying out 85% as dividends/buybacks. The remaining 15% they can reinvest at 17% ROE, which gives 15%*17%= 2.55% growth. I base this on a required rate of return of 10% and the Gordon Growth Model, which states: "fair P/B = (ROE-growth)/(required rate of return-growth)" Then the formula becomes: P/B = (17%-2.55%) / (10%-2.55%) = 1.94x The formula thus states that the company should be priced at 1.94x P/B given the assumptions I made and a 10% required rate of return. If one takes Storebrand's EK of 76kr and multiplies this by 1.94, we get 147.44 as the intrinsic value of the company (without any margin of safety). If one has a required rate of return of 12%, it becomes 116.2kr/share fair according to this model. If one buys the share today at 194 kr, one can expect a return of 8.2% given this model. I set my buying price at 120 kr as I believe this provides a good margin of safety and a high enough expected return for the risk one takes. NOTE: This is not a perfect model, and is based on my own assumptions. I welcome nuances in the comment section. Disclaimer: These are my thoughts and should NOT be seen as a recommendation, do your own Research or talk to an advisor. what I write may also be wrong.An AI answer to Rolfkuø who uses AI The short answer: There isn't one thing that is "wrong" in your analysis – but it is based on a series of assumptions that are unusually aggressive, and the model you use (Gordon Growth on P/B) has weaknesses when applied to a conglomerate like Stb. That is why your price target ends up extremely low compared to the market. Below I will go through what is actually amiss, point by point. Main takeaway The biggest weakness in the analysis is the combination of too high assumptions about ROE, too low required rate of return, and the use of a model that does not capture Stb's actual value drivers. When you change these to more realistic levels, the Gordon model collapses – and your price target becomes artificially low. 1. The ROE assumption (17 % perpetual ROE) is extremely high Stb has historically been around 10–13 % ROE. Assuming 17 % ROE indefinitely is: • far above historical levels • far above industry average • far above what regulatory capital requirements normally allow • far above what a mature financial conglomerate can achieve without significant risk A perpetual ROE of 17 % is more typical for niche banks, tech companies, or capital-light business models, not a large Nordic financial conglomerate. This alone strictly speaking makes your model more optimistic than the market, not more conservative. 2. Payout ratio of 85 % + 17 % ROE = mathematically inconsistent You assume: • 85 % payout • 15 % reinvestment • reinvested capital yields 17 % ROE → 2.55 % perpetual growth The problem is that high ROE + high payout + high growth do not cohere in a regulated financial company. In practice: • Stb cannot grow 2.55 % perpetually with an 85 % payout without increasing risk or raising capital. • Capital regulation (Solvency II, bank regulation) limits growth when payout is so high. • The market knows this – which is why Storebrand is not valued as a "compounder company". Your model assumes a capital structure that is not possible in reality. 3. Required rate of return of 10 % is too low for a financial conglomerate The market typically uses: • 11–13 % for banks • 12–14 % for insurance companies • 13–15 % for conglomerates with regulatory capital Stb has: • interest rate risk • market risk • insurance risk • bank risk • real estate risk • regulatory capital requirement • exposure to the Norwegian economy A required rate of return of 10 % is therefore not conservative – it is low. When you increase the required rate of return to realistic levels (12–14 %), the Gordon model falls dramatically. 4. Gordon Growth Model on P/B is very sensitive and often misleading The formula: P/B = (ROE – g) / (r – g) has three problems: a) It assumes that ROE, growth, and required rate of return are constant in perpetuity This is never true for financial companies. b) It assumes that all growth comes from reinvested equity Stb also grows through: • price adjustments • capital market returns • changes in risk profile • cost improvements • capital release • changes in Solvency II buffer This breaks the model's logic. c) It assumes that P/B is the correct valuation method The market uses: • sum-of-the-parts • embedded value • solvency capital ratio • capital market sensitivity • fee-based earnings • life insurance reserves • asset management multiples The Gordon model captures none of these. Continuation in next post
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
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt