2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
68 päivää sitten
250,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,73%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 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 13.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 18.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 13.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 23.4.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·3 päivää sittenSo we got ath again, my guess is that we are approaching 10,000 around next gf
·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- ·3.7.Interesting upward adjustment from Kreditbanken yesterday. The justification is: "Higher interest rate level than expected, higher fee income and value adjustments slightly above the expected". With a stated estimate of 95 mio. kr. for the half-year, it doesn't take much research to figure out that the 2nd quarter will yield a profit before tax of 53 mio. kr. compared to 42 mio. kr. in the first quarter. So, this represents a significant improvement. Is the upward adjustment indicative for the entire sector? I think so. The upward adjustment is justified by factors that should apply to the entire sector. Therefore, I could also well imagine that more upward adjustments are on the way – perhaps first with the publication of the half-year reports. If I were to make a guess, I personally believe it will most likely come from SJF Bank, Skjern Bank and Djurslands Bank. Without going into long explanations, the upward adjustment does not change my Top 3 Danish banks at current prices: 1. SJF Bank (yes, despite the increases over recent weeks, it is far, far too cheap) 2. Kreditbanken 3. Jyske Bank And now for the nerdy bit: There's just something essentially beautiful about announcing an estimate for the half-year result a little over a day after the books were closed. It testifies to a bank and management that have control over the business.
·29.6.Director Lars Frank Jensen turns 66 in about a week. A guess is that he will continue for a maximum of 1-3 years, and either a replacement must be found, or one - as seen in a number of other banks - takes the opportunity for a merger. Could AL Sydbank, Ringkjøbing Landbobank or possibly Sparekassen Danmark be the most interested buyers in that regard?Thanks for the review. It is appreciated. There have been many proud owners and founders of local banks throughout time. But they are also business people, I think. If it were completely unthinkable that the bank would be acquired, it would not trade at a P/B like a systemic bank like Jyske Bank, which is "too big to fail".- ·24.4.I had actually promised myself that you would be spared further input from me – at least until we hit the latter part of May, when the Q1 financial reporting is over. But two major exciting developments have hit the Danish banking world this week: Nykredit's acquisition of BEC and Nordea's financial reporting (or more specifically a special element in the quarterly report). I don't actually have a qualified opinion on the member banks under BEC selling their minority interests to Nykredit. I don't know the details of the agreement well enough for that. But my first impulse was a wonder, however, that they are now putting all their eggs in one basket – both as providers of Totalkredit products – but now also by letting Nykredit be responsible for and own the entire data platform. The revenues, which today have led to upward adjustments at BEC, are by their nature one-off, and these revenues often provide the most benefit in the short term… The detail in Nordea's financial report is, in my view, actually more interesting, as it focuses on one of the two areas that I would pay attention to this reporting season. Nordea chose to reverse the management estimate for losses, which as of 31.12.2025 was 160 million euro, so that as of 31.03.2026 it amounts to 0 euro. The reversal actually only amounted to 0.3% of Nordea's market capitalization, so why is it interesting? Two reasons: (1) In reality, it is an expression that Nordea stands by their ordinary valuation of loans, i.e., there is no need for further action when their ordinary processes are followed. Could other banks be imagined to follow this logic? (2) For the other banks, the provision for losses based on management estimate does not only constitute 0.3% of the market value. I have combed through all annual reports to assess the management estimate as of 31.12.2025 in relation to both the announced expected result for 2026 and the current market value. In other words, if other banks fully or partially follow Nordea's example, will it then also just be a detail for nerds? The answer is a resounding no. Where Nordea's management estimate as of 31.12.2025 amounted to 0.3% of the market value, this is how it looks for some selected other banks (in relation to current market value at close 26.04.2026): - Kreditbanken 9,8% - Føroya Banki 5,2% - Hvidbjerg Bank 4,1% - Djurslands Bank 3,8% - Skjern Bank 3,5% - Jyske Bank 3,1% If one looks at the provision in relation to the median of the announced expectations for the annual result after tax: - Kreditbanken 115,3% - Hvidbjerg Bank 56,4% - Føroya Banki 54,8% In comparison, Nordea's now reversed provision was 3.3% in relation to their realized result for 2025. I acknowledge that different banks have different prerequisites and operate in different markets – but it will be exciting to see if any of the other banks will follow Nordea's example – perhaps later in the year. In that case, the upward adjustments at several Danish banks, which have been announced today as a result of the sale of ownership interests in BEC, will not be the last of the year…I hope you are right, but I believe that many of these undefined provisions are due to recommendations from the supervisory authority and that a reversal can at least result in a risk annotation and perhaps even an order. Nordea is under Finnish supervision, and they may have a different and more common European approach than the Danish one, which is known for a very activist approach.
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.
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.
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
68 päivää sitten
250,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,73%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
Kirjaudu
- ·3 päivää sittenSo we got ath again, my guess is that we are approaching 10,000 around next gf
- ·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
- ·3.7.Interesting upward adjustment from Kreditbanken yesterday. The justification is: "Higher interest rate level than expected, higher fee income and value adjustments slightly above the expected". With a stated estimate of 95 mio. kr. for the half-year, it doesn't take much research to figure out that the 2nd quarter will yield a profit before tax of 53 mio. kr. compared to 42 mio. kr. in the first quarter. So, this represents a significant improvement. Is the upward adjustment indicative for the entire sector? I think so. The upward adjustment is justified by factors that should apply to the entire sector. Therefore, I could also well imagine that more upward adjustments are on the way – perhaps first with the publication of the half-year reports. If I were to make a guess, I personally believe it will most likely come from SJF Bank, Skjern Bank and Djurslands Bank. Without going into long explanations, the upward adjustment does not change my Top 3 Danish banks at current prices: 1. SJF Bank (yes, despite the increases over recent weeks, it is far, far too cheap) 2. Kreditbanken 3. Jyske Bank And now for the nerdy bit: There's just something essentially beautiful about announcing an estimate for the half-year result a little over a day after the books were closed. It testifies to a bank and management that have control over the business.
- ·29.6.Director Lars Frank Jensen turns 66 in about a week. A guess is that he will continue for a maximum of 1-3 years, and either a replacement must be found, or one - as seen in a number of other banks - takes the opportunity for a merger. Could AL Sydbank, Ringkjøbing Landbobank or possibly Sparekassen Danmark be the most interested buyers in that regard?Thanks for the review. It is appreciated. There have been many proud owners and founders of local banks throughout time. But they are also business people, I think. If it were completely unthinkable that the bank would be acquired, it would not trade at a P/B like a systemic bank like Jyske Bank, which is "too big to fail".
- ·24.4.I had actually promised myself that you would be spared further input from me – at least until we hit the latter part of May, when the Q1 financial reporting is over. But two major exciting developments have hit the Danish banking world this week: Nykredit's acquisition of BEC and Nordea's financial reporting (or more specifically a special element in the quarterly report). I don't actually have a qualified opinion on the member banks under BEC selling their minority interests to Nykredit. I don't know the details of the agreement well enough for that. But my first impulse was a wonder, however, that they are now putting all their eggs in one basket – both as providers of Totalkredit products – but now also by letting Nykredit be responsible for and own the entire data platform. The revenues, which today have led to upward adjustments at BEC, are by their nature one-off, and these revenues often provide the most benefit in the short term… The detail in Nordea's financial report is, in my view, actually more interesting, as it focuses on one of the two areas that I would pay attention to this reporting season. Nordea chose to reverse the management estimate for losses, which as of 31.12.2025 was 160 million euro, so that as of 31.03.2026 it amounts to 0 euro. The reversal actually only amounted to 0.3% of Nordea's market capitalization, so why is it interesting? Two reasons: (1) In reality, it is an expression that Nordea stands by their ordinary valuation of loans, i.e., there is no need for further action when their ordinary processes are followed. Could other banks be imagined to follow this logic? (2) For the other banks, the provision for losses based on management estimate does not only constitute 0.3% of the market value. I have combed through all annual reports to assess the management estimate as of 31.12.2025 in relation to both the announced expected result for 2026 and the current market value. In other words, if other banks fully or partially follow Nordea's example, will it then also just be a detail for nerds? The answer is a resounding no. Where Nordea's management estimate as of 31.12.2025 amounted to 0.3% of the market value, this is how it looks for some selected other banks (in relation to current market value at close 26.04.2026): - Kreditbanken 9,8% - Føroya Banki 5,2% - Hvidbjerg Bank 4,1% - Djurslands Bank 3,8% - Skjern Bank 3,5% - Jyske Bank 3,1% If one looks at the provision in relation to the median of the announced expectations for the annual result after tax: - Kreditbanken 115,3% - Hvidbjerg Bank 56,4% - Føroya Banki 54,8% In comparison, Nordea's now reversed provision was 3.3% in relation to their realized result for 2025. I acknowledge that different banks have different prerequisites and operate in different markets – but it will be exciting to see if any of the other banks will follow Nordea's example – perhaps later in the year. In that case, the upward adjustments at several Danish banks, which have been announced today as a result of the sale of ownership interests in BEC, will not be the last of the year…I hope you are right, but I believe that many of these undefined provisions are due to recommendations from the supervisory authority and that a reversal can at least result in a risk annotation and perhaps even an order. Nordea is under Finnish supervision, and they may have a different and more common European approach than the Danish one, which is known for a very activist approach.
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 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 13.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 18.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 13.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 23.4.2025 |
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
68 päivää sitten
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.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 13.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 18.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 22.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 13.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 23.4.2025 |
250,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
2,73%Tuotto/v
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·3 päivää sittenSo we got ath again, my guess is that we are approaching 10,000 around next gf
- ·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
- ·3.7.Interesting upward adjustment from Kreditbanken yesterday. The justification is: "Higher interest rate level than expected, higher fee income and value adjustments slightly above the expected". With a stated estimate of 95 mio. kr. for the half-year, it doesn't take much research to figure out that the 2nd quarter will yield a profit before tax of 53 mio. kr. compared to 42 mio. kr. in the first quarter. So, this represents a significant improvement. Is the upward adjustment indicative for the entire sector? I think so. The upward adjustment is justified by factors that should apply to the entire sector. Therefore, I could also well imagine that more upward adjustments are on the way – perhaps first with the publication of the half-year reports. If I were to make a guess, I personally believe it will most likely come from SJF Bank, Skjern Bank and Djurslands Bank. Without going into long explanations, the upward adjustment does not change my Top 3 Danish banks at current prices: 1. SJF Bank (yes, despite the increases over recent weeks, it is far, far too cheap) 2. Kreditbanken 3. Jyske Bank And now for the nerdy bit: There's just something essentially beautiful about announcing an estimate for the half-year result a little over a day after the books were closed. It testifies to a bank and management that have control over the business.
- ·29.6.Director Lars Frank Jensen turns 66 in about a week. A guess is that he will continue for a maximum of 1-3 years, and either a replacement must be found, or one - as seen in a number of other banks - takes the opportunity for a merger. Could AL Sydbank, Ringkjøbing Landbobank or possibly Sparekassen Danmark be the most interested buyers in that regard?Thanks for the review. It is appreciated. There have been many proud owners and founders of local banks throughout time. But they are also business people, I think. If it were completely unthinkable that the bank would be acquired, it would not trade at a P/B like a systemic bank like Jyske Bank, which is "too big to fail".
- ·24.4.I had actually promised myself that you would be spared further input from me – at least until we hit the latter part of May, when the Q1 financial reporting is over. But two major exciting developments have hit the Danish banking world this week: Nykredit's acquisition of BEC and Nordea's financial reporting (or more specifically a special element in the quarterly report). I don't actually have a qualified opinion on the member banks under BEC selling their minority interests to Nykredit. I don't know the details of the agreement well enough for that. But my first impulse was a wonder, however, that they are now putting all their eggs in one basket – both as providers of Totalkredit products – but now also by letting Nykredit be responsible for and own the entire data platform. The revenues, which today have led to upward adjustments at BEC, are by their nature one-off, and these revenues often provide the most benefit in the short term… The detail in Nordea's financial report is, in my view, actually more interesting, as it focuses on one of the two areas that I would pay attention to this reporting season. Nordea chose to reverse the management estimate for losses, which as of 31.12.2025 was 160 million euro, so that as of 31.03.2026 it amounts to 0 euro. The reversal actually only amounted to 0.3% of Nordea's market capitalization, so why is it interesting? Two reasons: (1) In reality, it is an expression that Nordea stands by their ordinary valuation of loans, i.e., there is no need for further action when their ordinary processes are followed. Could other banks be imagined to follow this logic? (2) For the other banks, the provision for losses based on management estimate does not only constitute 0.3% of the market value. I have combed through all annual reports to assess the management estimate as of 31.12.2025 in relation to both the announced expected result for 2026 and the current market value. In other words, if other banks fully or partially follow Nordea's example, will it then also just be a detail for nerds? The answer is a resounding no. Where Nordea's management estimate as of 31.12.2025 amounted to 0.3% of the market value, this is how it looks for some selected other banks (in relation to current market value at close 26.04.2026): - Kreditbanken 9,8% - Føroya Banki 5,2% - Hvidbjerg Bank 4,1% - Djurslands Bank 3,8% - Skjern Bank 3,5% - Jyske Bank 3,1% If one looks at the provision in relation to the median of the announced expectations for the annual result after tax: - Kreditbanken 115,3% - Hvidbjerg Bank 56,4% - Føroya Banki 54,8% In comparison, Nordea's now reversed provision was 3.3% in relation to their realized result for 2025. I acknowledge that different banks have different prerequisites and operate in different markets – but it will be exciting to see if any of the other banks will follow Nordea's example – perhaps later in the year. In that case, the upward adjustments at several Danish banks, which have been announced today as a result of the sale of ownership interests in BEC, will not be the last of the year…I hope you are right, but I believe that many of these undefined provisions are due to recommendations from the supervisory authority and that a reversal can at least result in a risk annotation and perhaps even an order. Nordea is under Finnish supervision, and they may have a different and more common European approach than the Danish one, which is known for a very activist approach.
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