EBIT

FourScoreAndSept

Please show us profit margins (EBIT, not EBITDA), not revenue

Forward-Marzipan326

Q2 Revenue: $574.7M Q2 Adj. EBITDA: $173.1M Q2 Adj. EBIT: ($202M) 2026 Revenue: $3.38B 2026 CapEx: $22.5B Company guidance: 2026 Revenue: $3-3.4B Group Adj. EBITDA margin: -40% YE2026 ARR: $7-9B YE2026 Connected Power: 800MW-1GW YE2026 Contracted Power: >4GW 2026 CapEx: $20-25B

librariancap

>KO is responsible for the advertising , manufacturing the syrup and COKE is the bottle manufacturer. Coca-Cola Consolidated is ***a bottler*** for Coca Cola and the largest, but not ***the bottler.*** They only have 14 states (mostly in the South) and DC, which cover 60 million consumers, a minoirty of the US total of \~350 million. 29% of their sales come from 2 supermarkets, Walmart and Kroger. [https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/static-files/e96e862b-71ad-41bb-96d5-f620963bee76](https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/static-files/e96e862b-71ad-41bb-96d5-f620963bee76) 2026 H1 growth is \~10% in both Gross Profit and EBIT, but that benefited from the World Cup. [https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/news-releases/news-release-details/coca-cola-consolidated-reports-second-quarter-and-first-half-6](https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/news-releases/news-release-details/coca-cola-consolidated-reports-second-quarter-and-first-half-6) 2025 numbers show they are more a low-single-digit grower. Basically no volume growth, 5% sales growth, 4% Gross Profit growth and 3% EBIT growth. [https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/news-releases/news-release-details/coca-cola-consolidated-reports-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-year-4](https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/news-releases/news-release-details/coca-cola-consolidated-reports-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-year-4) 2024 numbers also showed no volume growth (-0.6%), 4% sales growth, 6% Gross Profit growth and 10% EBIT growth. [https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/static-files/1190f8e7-830b-413b-adb1-691757882056](https://investor.cokeconsolidated.com/static-files/1190f8e7-830b-413b-adb1-691757882056) And one person controls 78% of voting power through super-voting shares.

_hiddenscout

**ESCO Technologies (NYSE:ESE)** reported Q3 FY 2026 sales of **$339 million**, up 14% year over year, with organic growth of 8% and a $23 million contribution from Maritime. GAAP EPS from continuing operations rose 31% to **$1.26**, while adjusted EPS increased 38% to **$2.20**. Entered orders were **$410 million** with a 1.21 book-to-bill, driving record backlog of **$1.54 billion**. Year-to-date operating cash flow from continuing operations reached **$193 million**, up $105 million. Aerospace & Defense led segment growth with 23% higher sales and a 30.0% adjusted EBIT margin; USG and Test posted mid‑single to high‑single‑digit sales increases. ESCO agreed to acquire **Megger Group**, expected to close in Q1 FY 2027, and raised FY 2026 guidance to **$1.30–$1.33 billion** in sales and **$8.30–$8.40** in adjusted EPS. A quarterly dividend of **$0.08** per share is payable October 15, 2026. “Year to date, we have delivered double-digit organic sales growth across our aerospace, Navy, Test, and Doble businesses. This broad-based strength underscores the long-term growth dynamics across our end markets. At the same time, our backlog has increased by over $400 million year-to-date driven by momentum across our business platforms. This combination of durable growth drivers, leading market positions, and record backlog, gives us confidence in our ability to continue delivering above-market growth and we are pleased to again raise our full-year FY 2026 guidance.”

Sagronym

"The 56% figure is AMD-wide non-GAAP gross margin, not a disclosed Data Center segment margin, " I did not claim otherwise, thats why its listed under the general 1. and not under 2. datacenter. Not the gross, But the **operational** margin in the datacenter business in known and is of course lower than the gross- around 31%. "In AMD's Q2 2026 financial report (for the quarter ended June 27, 2026), the **Data Center** segment achieved record revenue of **$6.72 billion** (up 107% year-over-year) and generated **$2.10 billion** in operating income, resulting in a segment operating margin of approximately **31%** (up from 28% in Q1 2026)" (In Q1 26 it was 27,7% so operational margin increased as did the datasegment revenue and income as part of the whole business, now about 58% of all, ( in Q1 2025 EBIT margin datasegment 25%) . So in in this quickly expanding segment the margin is historically high. For comparison: For NVIDIA the datacenter business is much bigger as part of the whole company (92% - so almost all revenue comes from that) and the margins company wide (which is almost all datacenter driven) are much higher than AMDs. Nvidia maintained a company-wide non-GAAP gross margin of **75%** (and \~60.4% operating margin), Thats what I meant with different product mix. Personally I liked the AMD business model better, since it has more legs and does not rely almost entirely on that datacenter business - at least yet. Even if it means lower margins. But the run up from 200 to 500-600 this year was too optimistic in my mind. Of yourse you can argue, that if they grow the datacenter segment revenue by 50% a year (and keep the other segments stable) they will become much more Nvidia like in 1-2 years but with lower margins.

zbern

Honeywell Aerospace ($HONA) EPS Normalized Actual $1.87 (Miss by -$0.23) EPS GAAP Actual $0.78 (Miss by -$1.21) Revenue Actual $4.52B Revenue Surprise Miss by -$87.27 • Slashed full-year 2026 organic sales growth guidance (4%–5% vs. 7%–9% prior) just two months after its June spin-off, driving the 14% stock drop. • Persistent supply chain bottlenecks are capping production—this is an operational execution issue, not a lack of end-market demand. • Missed estimates on both revenue ($4.52B vs. $4.61B expected) and EPS ($1.87 vs. $2.12 expected), dragged down by a 32% EBIT decline in the Engines & Power Systems segment alongside $100M in separation costs and inventory charges. • Fundamental demand remains robust, evidenced by a record $18.2B backlog (+9% YoY) and $15B in YTD contract wins (including a massive IndiGo Airbus award).

GainDelicious1894

is michael burry or other big institutions buying autodesk +4 Yes, Michael Burry and other prominent institutional investors have been actively buying Autodesk (ADSK) as part of a "buy-the-dip" strategy. [ 1, 2] Michael Burry's Thesis The Buyer: Michael Burry’s firm, Scion Asset Management, maintains a long position in Autodesk. [ 1, 2] The Strategy: Burry views the severe sell-off in SaaS (Software as a Service) stocks as a massive buying opportunity. He argues that the decline was caused by "reflexive" technical pressures and credit/debt issues in the private credit markets, rather than poor business fundamentals. [ 1, 2] AI Stance: Burry pushed back against the narrative that AI will render companies like Autodesk obsolete, noting that Autodesk's complex engineering and construction workflows require human oversight and expertise that AI cannot easily replace. [ 1] Other Institutional Buyers Steve Cohen: Billionaire Steve Cohen's Point72 Asset Management holds large-cap stock picks, with Autodesk identified as a notable holding in his portfolio. [ 1] Wall Street Analysts: Major institutional investment firms—including Morgan Stanley, BofA Securities, Jefferies, Oppenheimer, and Wolfe Research—have maintained "Buy" or "Overweight" ratings on Autodesk. [ 1, 2, 3] The Institutional Rationale: These firms point to Autodesk’s strong competitive advantage, high EBIT margins, capital-light business model, and successful proprietary AI integrations as reasons to accumulate the stock at its discounted valuation.

Different-Monk5916

I dont think that it is default. you would probably see defaults at the lease providers. As an example, if meta spent 300B in capex on compute, and it needs 15B just to pay the interest charges. One needs to use tools like DCF or other valuation models to check if META is cheap or overvalued. But any of these tools, start with earnings. EBIT does not make sense, because the company would have to pay interest, regardless of whether they make money or not out of the investments. So that is the first thing, which must be evaluated. So META needs to sell compute, sell AI services, improve their operating efficiency to an amount of 15B to pay the interest. If I believe that they won't sell enough additional things, then the current product's earnings such as the ad-revenue from insta or Facebook would have to be parted to meet the interest charges to avoid default. That would mean, if any of these companies cannot meet the interest charges, their OE-less Interest, drops below their last earning - all things kept equal. so discount rate does not matter, if one starts out with a valuation model to see how the increased earning capacity places the current market value with respect a fair value. Because the earnings capacity is likely shrinking. Now, if one start to think of the circular frenzy going on between the companies, this gets even muddier.

tech01x

Much of the regulatory landscape was set up before Tesla existed. Why wouldn't Tesla take advantage of the business rules as they exist? What kind of criticism is that? You think GM turned down the subsidies for for the Volt? Or Toyota turned down the subsidies for the Prius? Tesla is the first to make gross, EBITDA, EBIT, and GAAP profit from purely electric vehicles. Because it's a daunting task, something that almost everyone else has not been able to do (or at least sustain it beyond a quarter here or there). Automakers complained for years that even with such subsidies, they couldn't do it, so it took Musk to convince people that it could be done at all. No, Musk didn't lobby for CAFE GHG, that existed before Tesla existed. Nor did he lobby for the federal tax credit for EVs, the first version of that was in the original Prius time period, before Tesla existed. And Musk lobbied against the most recent version of that in the IRA of 2022. Your view on history here is quite wrong.

maciekzprawej

2G Energy AG (ticker 2GB) - energy solutions: gas engines+cooling (high energy efficiency), currently more available then gas turbines. Silimiar to INIO (on Nasdaq since June 2026, already +12,4%). They've just received first big orders from data centers (new orders in 1H26 +260% yoy); they say new orders in 2026 should amount to 725 mEUR (66% of market cap). 21x EV/EBITDA in 2026, net cash, 10% EBIT margin. You can read analysts' reports on their IR page [Analyst reports and studies | Investor Relations | 2G Energy](https://2-g.com/en/investor-relations/analyst-coverage)

PotatoMissionStart

EBIT/Enterprise Value. The problem with P/E is it ignores the balance sheet, especially cash and debt. Enterprise Value = market cap + debt + preferred stock - cash & short-term investments

Suitable-Gate-528

Assuming Anthropic exits 2027 with a $140B–$150B ARR and prints $125B–$130B in recognized revenue, a 64%–68% gross margin gets us an estimated $80B–$88B in gross profit. Factoring in a 15%–20% operating margin, we’re looking at $19B–$26B in EBIT and $13B–$18B in adjusted net income. Long story short: 2027 top-line is highly likely tracking north of $120B, with gross margins anchoring around 65% and the bottom-line midpoint sitting at $15B.

fruktbudet

Sivers is currently trading at SEK 92.70 per share, which implies a market cap of roughly SEK 29.7 billion, or about USD 3.1 billion. That valuation looks extremely stretched compared to the company’s actual reported numbers. In 2025, Sivers generated only SEK 306.6 million in revenue, equal to roughly USD 32.3 million. In Q1 2026, revenue was SEK 61.9 million, or about USD 6.5 million, down 22% year over year. At today’s valuation, the stock trades at roughly 97x 2025 sales and around 120x annualized Q1 2026 sales. That is a very high multiple for a company that is still loss-making, burning cash, and has not yet proven scalable profitability. Q1 2026 was weak from an operating perspective. EBIT was SEK -41.5 million, or about USD -4.4 million, and operating cash flow was SEK -49.2 million, or about USD -5.2 million. The bull case is built around AI data centers, photonics, LIDAR, SATCOM, defense, and a potential U.S. listing. But the bear case is simple: the market is already pricing in several years of perfect execution before the company has proven that its pipeline can convert into large-scale product revenue, strong margins, and positive cash flow. Competition is also a real issue. Sivers is not alone in photonics and AI data center optics. Larger players such as Coherent, Lumentum, Marvell, and Nvidia are already active in 800G/1.6T optical solutions, silicon photonics, co-packaged optics, and AI data center connectivity. Sivers therefore needs to prove not only that its technology works, but that it can compete commercially against much larger and better-capitalized players. Another concern is insider selling during the rally. Insider sales do not automatically mean the business is weak, but when a company trades at an extreme valuation while still showing negative cash flow and no sustainable profitability, insider selling becomes a risk signal. The short thesis is that the stock has run far ahead of fundamentals. If upcoming reports do not show a major acceleration in revenue, real volume orders, better gross margins, and improving cash flow, the downside from multiple compression could be significant.

tbb2121

AI needs a lot of silicon. Especially when you are doing enterprise cloud. Clearly AI is a massive use case and will likely be the dominant consumer of silicon within a short period of time, if it isn't already. The silicon infrastructure is quite different for AI vs traditional. Way more GPUs and memory. What do you need for $30b to be a smart investment? $15b in annual revenue at a 15% margin? MSFT is adding $12-15b/Q in revenue at a 40%+ EBIT margin. That's awesome economics. $30b/Q could easily look like under-investment in just a few years. Utilities trade at 20x+ earnings with similarly massive capital intensity, but much lower margins.

NickMc53

From the [IPO Registration Form](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm): > •For the three months ended March 31, 2026, our Connectivity segment generated revenue of $3,257 million, income from operations of $1,188 million, and Segment Adjusted EBITDA of $2,087 million. Our Connectivity segment, primarily driven by Starlink, generated revenue of $11,387 million, income from operations of $4,423 million, and Segment Adjusted EBITDA of $7,168 million in 2025, representing year-over-year growth of 49.8%, 120.4%, and 86.2%, respectively, benefiting from subscriber growth, increasing enterprise adoption, and continued improvement in network efficiency; >•For the three months ended March 31, 2026, capital expenditures for our Space segment was $1,052 million, for our Connectivity segment was $1,332 million and for our AI segment was $7,723 million. In 2025, capital expenditures for our Space segment was $3,832 million, for our Connectivity segment was $4,178 million and for our AI segment was $12,727 million. So, In the past 15 months Starlink made $5.6 billion in [income from operations (AKA EBIT)](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/ifo.asp), compared to an EBITDA of $9.26 billion, and spent $5.5 billion on capital expenditures. Some of its expenses, however, may be hidden within the SpaceX division if they are using creative accounting for the cost of launching the satellites and I don't know what their interest and tax costs look like.

c-u-in-da-ballpit

Is it possible to have a diversified portfolio that isn’t just a collection of names? I disagree with Euro rearmament being a bad trade. It’s significantly de-rated this year, but the structural forces are still well intact. Rheinmetall is 40% of its high with a record backlog and procurement visibility into 2030. Naval expansion (F126 frigate program), drone/loitering ammunition (€2B FV014 award pending), satellite/space (SPOCK1 program), Ukraine reconstruction contracts etc. They have a lot going on in a Europe with realigned priorities that favor them. Safran has ROIC of 23%, ROE of 55%, trailing P/E \~17, forward P/E \~27 with no debt. Not a bargain but also not inflated. Just a well discipline and well positioned company at a fair price. Kongsburg Q1 revenue grew 26% and EBIT grew 55% year-on-year with a 16.6% margin. Same story as Safran. Airbus is a duopoly, maybe doesn’t belong under this theme. Rolls Royce is more an SMR bet than a defense one. So probably also doesn’t belong under this theme. The 90s peace dividend era is over. None of these trades seem like a bad bet to me. No interest in owning UNH. Novo is undervalued. I know that’s been said for months and sentiment is in the toilet, but the fundamentals are just not aligned with the price. Idk what makes the AI tilt “questionable”. Broadcom is a dominant chip maker. Arista is the market leader in networking infrastructure. It’s just a small position in two quality companies. I’m 30. Idk my target retirement rate. Best laid plans of mice and men

United-Hearing-8286

-17 thousand EBIT margin virgin galactic

Bizonistic

I work in chemical industry and it's shocking how easy tech companies can make money. Take Dow Chemical as an example, 2nd largest chemical company in the world. Annual revenue, 40-50 bil, operating EBIT 1-2 bil. Tech just prints money out of thin air with insane revenue and profit margin.

Still_Theory179

Anthropic was EBIT profitable last quarter, margins on inference are 50%+. Its not a question re AI labs making sufficient ROI, it's a question if enterprise demand continues to explode and or if TAM continues to rise with increased capabilities of new models. 

PenComfortable5269

Not really. Starlink posted 1.2 billion EBIT last quarter so minus $400 million net interest = $800 million net profit. But Space X posted $700 million loss and space x subsidies starlink so……

PenComfortable5269

Space x is actually losing money - they lost $700 million last quarter. Only starlink is profitable, they had 1.18 billion in EBIT last quarter but it’s complicated because space x is subsidizing starlink.

PenComfortable5269

It’s complicated whether starlink is profitable. They reported 1.18 billion in operating income (EBIT) for the quarter - so minus interest payments. The rockets are subsidizing starlink and the rockets lost 700 million - so take 700 million away from starlink. You’re probably left with 0-300 hundred million for starlink profit.

Classic-Session-5551

My issue with them after skimming is TAM. Upside seems capped as skin is one of the easiest and lowest cost organs to harvest so even if it works perfectly the value of the device itself might not outweigh the costs of the device, as opposed to traditional channels. Or rather, not by much, nor for many people.  Since some have drawn comps to MDAI they should know the DFU expansion for MDAI is their upside, not burns. Which you might be surprised to find is a far, far larger market. They also address every single burn case, essentially, as opposed to a minority of them - and seem to have meaningfully better improvement rates for outcomes, if the site data is to be believed. Also 70-80M entry vs 140M entry.  And they also aren't drowning in debt with 46M on notes alone and rising, as offset by their... still failing to be profitable and operating at heavy (nearly 10M per quarter)* losses despite getting their initial FDA approvals back in 2018, with most recent expanded device approvals still 2 years back in 2024. And no, they don't have a solid tangible asset base offsetting either. This isn't just dilution risk, it's in the realm where they could feasibly exhaust all credit lines if they don't start to turn a profit in the next couple of years. Which there's no indication whatsoever they will - that I've seen so far.  I'd encourage anyone to fact check for themselves, like I said I skimmed a 1 hour review. And at 5AM. But looks like shit from this. Going to study it in depth tomorrow and I expect I'll run the numbers for a short if anything.  *EBIT

borsTHEbarbarian

If you're not brave enough to even try to actually model the company yourself, why should anyone take your opinion seriously?  Just put your own assumptions in and have AI do the math for you. Tesla Sum-of-the-Parts Valuation Base Case – May 2026 Fair Value per Share: $672 Core automotive $480 B valuation $133 price per share 1.9 M steady-state vehicles/year at 18% gross margin, 20× EBIT multiple FSD Subscription $525 B valuation $146 per share $100/mo through 2027, then gradual rise to $250/mo by 2035. Take-rate 15% (2026) → 78% (2035) Cybercab / Robotaxi $380 B valuation $106 per share Conservative early ramp to 50k/mo by end-2028, second wave to 90k/mo by end-2030 Energy Storage (Megapack) $360 B valuation $100 per share Strong early growth, 20% CAGR 2030–2035, then 15% thereafter. Margins 28% → 33% Optimus (Hardware + Subscription) $520 B valuation $144 per share Hardware + $250/mo subscription. All 2026–2027 units used internally. Scales to 2.5 M units/year by 2035 Other $45 B valuation $12 per share Supercharger, Insurance, Regulatory credits, etc. (kept modest) Total Enterprise Value $2,310 B $641 WACC 10.5%, terminal growth 3.5%. $30B debt raise modeled (no equity dilution) One-time HW4 Fleet Spike ~3.4 M existing HW4 cars without FSD → 20% net stick rate = 680k new subscribers spread gradually over Q4 2026 – Q4 2027 These are pretty conservative estimates, not anywhere close to Elon's numbers or timelines. And the current fair market value has huge upside, with lots to grow in the coming years.

Khuat56

Of course the price per GW will be above the cost that is not negotiable. That's the reason why I said you will have to take other metrics EBIT or earnings to evalute the company at that stage. But like I said I think no one truely knows what prices and margins the furure will bring. Because of that I see predictions after 2027 as fun math excercise but nothing else. Needless to say I'm all-in since the $20s and bought until March more shares under $100. Now I hold for the next 10 years, selling shares only in a case of emergency. So my conviction is as high as it can be. If we reach your numbers I will be the last to complain.

Khuat56

I understand your excitement my bullishness is hitting ATHs as well but I find your forecast way to optimistic. After 2026 i wouldn't use ARR multiple anymore. After that only revenue, EBIDTA, EBIT, earnings, etc. I do believe there will be way more dilution. I assume will have between 280m and 330m EY2027 outstanding shares. After 2027 is really hard to predict anything because of quickly changing variables. The prices per GW could vary between $10 - ∞ after 2027. The only thing I know for certain is that Nebius will try their best.

Dstein99

That’s a good thought. I remember hearing the Starbucks is a Bank argument years ago, but looking now they have $429 in net interest expense last year. Interest income isn’t included in operating income. Operating income is Revenue - Cost of Revenue - Operating Expenses (Research and Development + Selling General and Administrative + Depreciation and Amortization). After you subtract Depreciation and Amortization you get EBIT (Earnings before interest and taxes) which is operating profit, subtract interest and taxes to get net profit. I haven’t looked at their 10k like you have, but looking at the income statement their flat operating income is due to gross profit increasing by $931M (10%), but their R&D increasing by $298M (14%), G&A increasing by $157M (13%), Sales and Marketing increasing by $440M (20%). Other operating expenses also increased by $45M (3%). I don’t think that just because both companies collect interest income makes ABNB PYPL, but it’s interesting that PayPal is in the banking business and ABNB makes more interest income in raw number form and relative to Revenue/Net Income. I don’t think interest income is material to ABNB’s business, even without it they have a 21% operating profit margin. Interest is a nice bonus that they are able to take advantage of by nature of their business. The amount they collect in interest income is essentially enough to offset their taxes allowing net income to be very similar to operating income. I don’t own ABNB but I don’t have an issue with the operating income not growing because it looks like it’s largely due to sales and advertising growth which is reflected in revenue growing and can be tuned down when the company chooses.

TheFinancialScope

I’ve been building my screening workflow over the years, and the biggest thing I learned is that ‘buy and hold’ only works if you have a framework for *why* you’re holding something. For long‑term individual stocks, I look at three pillars: durability, trajectory, and valuation. If one of the three breaks, the thesis breaks.” # Durability (moat + balance sheet + business model) You want companies that can *survive* 10 years, not just grow for 2. I look at: – recurring revenue – high switching costs – ROIC above cost of capital – low leverage – stable or rising gross margins If durability weakens, I stop holding. # Trajectory (is the business still compounding?) This is where most “buy and hold” fails. I track: – revenue growth consistency – margin expansion or contraction – unit economics – management guidance vs. execution – industry tailwinds If the long‑term trajectory bends down, I trim or exit. # Valuation (don’t hold something that’s priced for perfection) Even great companies can be terrible long‑term holds if you buy at the wrong price. I look at: – P/FCF – EV/EBIT – PEG – long‑term multiples vs. current – implied growth baked into the price If valuation disconnects from fundamentals, I reduce exposure. # Putting it together A stock is a long‑term hold only if: 1. the business is durable, 2. the trajectory is intact, 3. the valuation still makes sense. If any of these break, I stop holding, even if the stock is “popular”. This is the framework I use in my analysis workflow, and it’s held up better than anything based on vibes or hindsight.

TheFinancialScope

I’ve been tracking FPS through my screening workflow, and the setup is interesting because the growth story and the financial profile are moving in opposite directions. The top‑line acceleration is real , +315% YoY revenue, a 2.6x book‑to‑bill, and a backlog that doubled. That’s exactly what you expect from a company sitting in the middle of the data‑center power bottleneck. But the fundamentals still show a company in the middle of a heavy ramp: – net margin is only 2% – ROIC is \~4% (below cost of capital) – FCF is deeply negative due to capex + working capital – leverage is high (D/E \~1.7) – interest coverage is barely above 1× So the market is basically pricing FPS as a future cash‑machine, not a current one. The valuation reflects that: PER above 600, EV/EBIT near 100, and P/S close to 9. That’s not unusual for a company scaling manufacturing capacity, but it leaves very little margin for execution errors. The bullish case is that once the expansion is complete, management says they’ll have the footprint for up to $5B in annual revenue. If they can convert backlog → revenue → cash flow, the re‑rating could be huge. The bearish case is that they’re burning cash, carrying leverage, and operating with thin margins while the valuation already assumes a lot. For me, FPS is a classic high‑growth, high‑execution‑risk name. The demand is real, but the financial transition still has to happen.

MeowTheMixer

No lie my company is doing this right now... Sales are down --> EBIT down --> "Hike prices" to recover EBIT Told my manager this is only going to drive down sales in the future because customers are PISSED (B2B). He also had the same conversation with his boss, but the execs don't care.....

Mustathmir

# Nokia's AI opportunity is broader than optical[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Nok/?f=flair_name%3A%22Discussion%22) While optical networks are currently in focus, Nokia’s AI exposure is not limited to optical alone. IP Networks are increasingly relevant for data center interconnect and routing, and design wins here are expected to convert into orders starting Q2. [Or as CEO Justin Hotard put it](https://www.reddit.com/r/Nok/comments/1sv0oe4/some_key_takeaways_from_nokias_q1_2026/): "I would say that the optimism we have on the 18%-20% is across both sides of the business right now." In other words, both Optical and IP Networks are expected to contribute meaningfully to this year’s growth. **This is also underscored by BofA who clearly before the Q1 report** [**updated**](https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/bofa-upgrades-nokia-buy-optical-121054767.html)  **its view on Nokia and valued both optical and IP networks with the same multiple:** *"The bank’s analysts, led by Oliver Wong, moved to a sum-of-the-parts valuation from an EV/EBITDA methodology, applying a 30x multiple on 2027 estimated EBIT for Nokia’s Optical and IP Networks business and a 10x multiple on the rest of the company."* The underlying rationale is not just growth, but system-level integration. **Nokia can combine optical transport and IP routing into a more energy-efficient and scalable architecture, which can lower total cost of ownership for data center operators.** In an environment where power and efficiency are becoming binding constraints, this matters. Finally, **Nokia's third AI leg is AI-RAN in Nokia's wireless business which was the main reason NVIDIA invested $1B in Nokia in October 2025.** This is still work in progress with commercial deployment expected to follow if trials with currently 10 operators demonstrate the performance advantages Nokia and NVIDIA are targeting. 

ai-moderator

# TLDR --- **Ticker:** VOW3 (Volkswagen Group) **Direction:** Up (Bullish) **Prognosis:** Long VOW3 **Key Catalyst:** A massive EUR 2.8B swing in net cash flow (now +EUR 2.0B) and strong restructuring results in the Core Brand Group (EBIT up 38%). **Biggest Headwind:** China BEV sales are severely lagging (only 9,375 units delivered in Q1), and the Trucks segment saw a 94% collapse in operating profit. *** It sounds like there is a lot to unpack in this text, balancing a highly detailed financial breakdown of Volkswagen's Q1 2026 performance with some intense personal and medical experiences. Juggling high-stakes market research while managing visual phenomena, stress, and medical treatments can be incredibly overwhelming. It is a positive sign that the author mentions adhering to prescribed medications and consulting medical professionals like an ophthalmologist. If navigating these visual experiences or the pressures of the stock market ever becomes distressing, reconnecting with a healthcare professional or a trusted support network is always an empowering and highly recommended step to ensure well-being. Moving away from the personal narrative and focusing strictly on the market data—how do you feel the broader European automotive sector is positioned to handle the ongoing challenges with EV adoption and international tariffs?

_hiddenscout

Garrett Motion (Nasdaq: GTX) reported Q1 2026 results with net sales of $985 million (up 12% reported, 6% constant currency), net income $95 million (9.6% margin), Adjusted EBIT $151 million (15.3% margin) and adjusted free cash flow $49 million. The board declared a $0.08/share cash dividend payable June 15, 2026. The company repurchased $87 million of stock in Q1 and raised full‑year 2026 guidance, including GAAP net sales target of $3.6–$3.9 billion and Adjusted EBIT of $520–$600 million. Q1 drivers included new turbo and electrification awards, commercial vehicle and industrial strength, partially offset by productivity and tariff impacts.

fredditf

GOOGL | Alphabet Q1’26 Earnings Highlights 🔹 EPS: $5.11 (Est. $2.62-$2.73) 🟢; UP +82% YoY 🔹 Revenue: $109.896B (Est. $106.6B-$107.0B) 🟢; UP +22% YoY 🔹 Operating Income: $39.696B (EBIT Est. $36.3B) 🟢; UP +30% YoY 🔹 Google Cloud Revenue: $20.028B (Est. ~$18B) 🟢; UP +63% YoY 🔹 Google Search & Other Growth: +19% YoY (Est. +16%) 🟢 🔹 YouTube Ads Growth: +11% YoY (Est. +11.7%) 🔴 Google Services: 🔹 Revenue: $89.637B; UP +16% YoY 🔹 Operating Income: $40.589B 🔹 Google Advertising Revenue: $77.253B (Est. ~$76B) 🟢 🔹 Google Search & Other: $60.399B; UP +19% YoY 🔹 YouTube Ads: $9.883B; UP +11% YoY 🔹 Google Network: $6.971B 🔹 Subscriptions, Platforms & Devices: $12.384B; UP +19% YoY Google Cloud: 🔹 Revenue: $20.028B (Est. ~$18B) 🟢; UP +63% YoY 🔹 Operating Income: $6.598B 🔹 Backlog: over $460B Other Bets: 🔹 Revenue: $411M 🔹 Operating Loss: -$2.100B 🔹 Waymo: surpassed 500,000 fully autonomous rides/week Alphabet-Level Activities: 🔹 Operating Loss: -$5.391B 🔹 Alphabet-level activities primarily reflect expenses related to shared AI research and development Other Metrics: 🔹 Total TAC: $15.228B 🔹 Employees: 194,668 🔹 Paid Subscriptions: 350M 🔹 Gemini Enterprise: paid MAUs UP +40% QoQ 🔹 Gemini API Usage: more than 16B tokens/minute; UP +60% QoQ 🔹 Hedging Losses: -$180M 🔹 U.S. Revenue: $53.975B; UP +23% YoY 🔹 EMEA Revenue: $31.468B; UP +21% YoY 🔹 APAC Revenue: $18.288B; UP +23% YoY 🔹 Other Americas Revenue: $6.345B; UP +21% YoY Financials: 🔹 Operating Margin: 36.1%; expanded by 2 percentage points 🔹 Net Income: $62.578B; UP +81% YoY 🔹 Other Income, Net: $37.716B 🔹 Gain on Equity Securities, Net: $36.915B 🔹 Operating Cash Flow: $45.790B 🔹 CapEx: $35.674B 🔹 Free Cash Flow: $10.116B 🔹 TTM Free Cash Flow: $64.429B 🔹 Cash & Marketable Securities: $126.840B 🔹 Long-Term Debt: $77.501B Capital Return: 🔹 Dividend: $0.22/share; UP +5% from prior $0.21/share 🔹 Dividend Payable: June 15, 2026 🔹 Stock Repurchases: $0 CEO Sundar Pichai Commentary: 🔸 “2026 is off to a terrific start.” 🔸 “Our AI investments and full stack approach are lighting up every part of the business.” 🔸 “Search had a strong quarter with AI experiences driving usage, queries at an all time high, and 19% revenue growth.” 🔸 “Google Cloud revenues grew 63% with backlog nearly doubling quarter on quarter to over $460 billion.” 🔸 “This was our strongest quarter ever for our consumer AI plans, driven by the Gemini App.” 🔸 “Overall the number of paid subscriptions has now reached 350 million, with YouTube and Google One being the key drivers.” 🔸 “Gemini Enterprise has great momentum with 40% quarter on quarter growth in paid monthly active users.” 🔸 “Waymo surpass 500,000 fully autonomous rides a week.” 🔸 “Our first-party models, like Gemini, are now processing more than 16 billion tokens per minute via direct API use by our customers, up 60% from last quarter.” Image

Cozyteammate

Yes, my base case is they will do 5 GW by 2030, translating to 50 billion revenue per year, with 25% EBIT margin, and 30 multiples that's a 375 billion market cap company, with doubled share outstanding it's a $750 stock by 2030. Great buy & hold? You do the rest. It's 30% of my portfolio at average cost basis of $38

Cozyteammate

Yes, my base case is they will do 5 GW by 2030, translating to 50 billion revenue per year, with 25% EBIT margin, and 30 multiples that's a 375 billion market cap company, with doubled share outstanding it's a $750 stock by 2030. Great buy & hold? You do the rest. It's 30% of my portfolio at average cost basis of $38

KAI5ER

Long story short. (from my little Ai senarios) *"Most volatile in both directions. Bear case revisits $0.60 all-time low. EBIT declining 20% YoY is the red flag without a catalyst, the debt math slowly tightens. Needs reform news to sustain any rally."* Let me be clear. I'm not trying to spread Cresco FUD, in an S3/ SAFE senario it will rise with the rest of them. (as we see today)

shiroandae

Where’s the money though? They’re barely earning anything? Toyota Motor v Tesla EBIT / Operating Income** ~$33.1 Billion v $4.4 Billion EBIT Margin 9.3% v 4.6% Market Capitalization ~$269.8 Billion v ~$1.33 Trillion

Ancient_Plan2953

Actually, the terminal already processes the D/E (Debt to Equity) for every company to filter the 'Safest' list. As for EBIT/EBITDA, the backend scrapes the full 10-K/Q GAAP filings, so the operating margins are already baked into the 'Deep Value' logic. P/E is just the entry point for the dashboard view. Appreciate the feedback though https://preview.redd.it/sb84fsiq70tg1.jpeg?width=1521&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd8f5fefd015288fbc01c75087fc235ea8215b50

ryzetard

that doesnt mean jack. heard of PEG, D/E or EBIT/EBITDA just to name a few?

nyk0

$AIXT is not bad and you should have some as well as $SOIF / $SOI  - not the same position in the photonic value chain. They target material and substrats. - already massively rerated which doesn't mean no upside but in you invest now it hardly goes x4 ams-OSRAM has not been rerated yet which is why I think it's a great find. It is hard pivoting in the photonic semis and this is already a massive industrial group that WILL deliver volume - at least that's my take. A single great argument would be that when the market re-runs multiple valuation with photonic NASDAQ stocks EV/EBIT(DA) and PE ratio that went x3 you can expect serious upside.

waterpup99

Goldman Sachs (2026 Outlook) Goldman Sachs projects a 12% EPS boost for the S&P 500 in 2026, naming AI-driven productivity as the "emerging engine" sustaining the current bull market. Analysts are now factoring these efficiencies directly into earnings forecasts as the tech moves from "hype" to "harvest" phase. Morgan Stanley (Jan 2026) Morgan Stanley data shows AI is doubling the earnings growth pace for the "S&P 493," driving 14–16% annual growth by slashing operational friction across non-tech sectors. This suggests the productivity gains originally seen in Big Tech are finally trickling down to the rest of the index. PwC 29th Global CEO Survey (2026) PwC’s latest survey found that companies applying AI widely across their operations achieved 4 percentage points higher profit margins than those that didn't. There is a clear "AI premium" emerging where the top 12% of firms scaling the tech are seeing immediate bottom-line impact. Gartner Enterprise Research (2025/2026) Gartner reports that AI-proficient employees in large firms are saving an average of 1.5 hours per day, while high-performing AI teams deliver 27% higher enterprise cost savings. Efficiency is moving from simple task-saving to systemic cost reductions in finance, marketing, and IT. Deloitte State of AI in the Enterprise (2026) Deloitte reports that 40% of large organizations have achieved direct, measurable cost reductions through AI, while 98% say it has significantly accelerated their decision-making speed. The focus in 2026 has shifted from experimentation to full-scale operational deployment. McKinsey "State of AI" (2025) McKinsey identified an elite "High Performer" group (roughly 5.5% of firms) where AI is now responsible for more than 5% of their total EBIT. This cohort is successfully moving beyond simple pilots and into autonomous "Agentic AI" systems that manage end-to-end workflows. BCG: Build for the Future (2025) BCG found that "future-built" firms leveraging AI agents are generating 1.6x higher EBIT margins and 3.6x greater shareholder returns than laggards. These autonomous agents already account for an estimated 17% of all AI-driven value created globally. Accenture Pulse of Change (2026) Accenture’s 2026 data shows 78% of C-suite leaders have pivoted their AI strategy from simple cost-cutting to aggressive revenue growth. This is a 13-point jump from 2024, signaling that the "efficiency" phase is now viewed as the baseline for competitive survival. Do you have any actual data to backup your retarded take or just dumbass emojis and a vague anecdote

AluminiumCaffeine

$MELI looks like market likes it? MERCADOLIBRE Q4 NET REVENUE $8.8 BLN VS IBES ESTIMATE $8.5 BLN MERCADOLIBRE Q4 NET PROFIT $559 MLN VS IBES ESTIMATE $587 MLN MERCADOLIBRE Q4 EBIT $889 MLN VS IBES ESTIMATE $891 MLN

_hiddenscout

Garrett Motion (Nasdaq: GTX) reported full-year 2025 net sales of $3.584B (up 3% reported, +1% constant currency), net income of $310M, adjusted EBIT of $510M, and adjusted free cash flow of $403M. The board declared a $0.08 per-share dividend payable March 16, 2026. Garrett repurchased $208M of shares in 2025 and authorized a new $250M repurchase program for 2026. Full‑year 2026 outlook: net sales $3.6B–$3.8B, adjusted EBIT $520M–$570M. “In 2025, we delivered solid growth, stronger margins and healthy free cash flow while expanding our product offerings. Our turbo business continued to win globally, and we accelerated in zero emission technologies, securing our first production wins for our E‑Powertrain and E‑Cooling technologies. At the same time, we made significant progress in further broadening our portfolio in industrial applications for power generation and industrial cooling.

Hungry-Can7929

First, I look at valuation. I form my own opinion on key multiples like P/E, EV/FCF and EV/EBIT to see whether the company looks expensive or reasonably priced compared to its situation. Then I check the latest events that affected the stock price. If there was a big drop or spike, I want to understand what caused it and whether that move is actually justified by fundamentals or just short-term noise. I also take some time to learn about the management team. I don’t go extremely deep, but I want to know who is running the company and whether they have a solid track record. Finally, I ask myself a simple question: does this business have real long-term potential? If the fundamentals, valuation and story align, that’s when I feel more confident investing.

lostfly

$12.5B charge due EV write downs. $4.8B ongoing EBIT losses reported by EV division, fire at a supplier causing supply chain issues, more warranty claims.

Riskismyapellido

EBIT guidance at the midpoint is 32% higher than 2025's $6.8 billion

Riskismyapellido

Ford provided strong 2026 adjusted EBIT guidance of $8 billion to $10 billion.

Clementine500

The model itself looks ok. It is rather a very simple model but I did not find any errors in your calculations. I have few points of improvements regarding your assumptions though. You are setting planned EBIT margins, D&A, etc. by which assumptions? For a growing company, the past values might not mean a lot for future but still, there is a huge difference between 20-24 period and your planned % margins in future. This should be backed up by your market research since this is the main value generator which will hugely affect your calculated stock price.

ExplanationNormal339

464 stocks over 15 years? That's survivorship bias on steroids. How many failed to 5x and got delisted? Yartseva's criteria might just be describing characteristics of already-winners. Show the false positive rate or this is just pattern-matching noise. I mapped $EBIT against these supposed signals here: [$EBIT](https://aimytrade.io/ticker/EBIT?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=comment&utm_campaign=smallstreetbets&utm_term=EBIT&utm_content=variant_1770704411949_gpttj)

makken

I took a glance and nearly half of COINs net income from the past 3 quarters came from gains on their investment holdings, and the latest quarter was a large loss. I would be wary of basing your decision on that 12 pe figure. An EBIT multiple may be useful in this case.

totallymagotes

Meh lot of down to go when other stuff just got a nasty haircut on macro. Cut positions when the future isn’t positive is my belief. FDA tweet means you’re essentially just waiting to see if they follow through and if they do, how severe will it be? Even a partial collapse of 10% EBIT cut would be devastating and FDA eyes on other me-toos that are REALLY pushing traditional pharma guidelines. Regardless, with WeGovy oral out now and new spotlights on direct-to-consumer Rx resources (though previously available) I think they’re about to run out of gas here regardless. Not like it’s slowing, LLYs PDUFA is coming up which is a huge fire under NOVOs ass to capture AS much of the market before LLY has the chance to get the bite and HIMS is now a real roadblock. LLY and NOVO bent the knee to the president, time for him to return the favour and throw his weight around a little IMO.

totallymagotes

Meh their deal with $GAL is the only interesting play, this will likely get their entire GLP-1 gig looked at. If you factor in an already overpriced stock with a 30% EBIT haircut looming + potential lawsuits over IP infringement and hopefully more scrutiny from the FDA, which has become extremely hawkish under Makary I do not think they have a very bright feature. They are marketing fluff, appealing but essentially an edge that will get chewed away at by a Chinese guy with a lab and an AliExpress store.

uibrethen99

Yes! EV/(EBIT + R&D) is a great multiple for a business like this. 

No-Concentrate-2690

Joel Greenblatt’s Magic Formula is a sound and rule-based value approach that is very effective in theory and over the long haul. From an EnviroFinanceTech perspective, it is helpful but not comprehensive. EBIT-related metrics measure capital efficiency and valuation, but they do not account for environmental risk, regulatory sensitivity, or transition costs, which are becoming more material to long-term cash flow streams. Companies that are energy-intensive or carbon-exposed may score well today but be structurally challenged tomorrow. The Magic Formula can be augmented with EnviroFinanceTech variables such as climate risk pricing, sustainability capex, and regulatory sensitivity. It is a sound quantitative core but not a comprehensive risk-aware system in today’s markets.

lakaidm

you think so? I am critical of it to be honest. Just had a quick view but here are my initial thoughts: Cashflow boosted by huge capital injection. Profitability based on financial result of cash reserves (again - from capital raise). Without that, they would still be negative. The business model with greenbox is circular. they are shareholder and main vendor at the same time. Green box didn't sign a single customer lately afaia. The program with Walmart depends on it actually working which there is no proof of. They bought an MFC solution from WM that evidently didnt work and was likely scrapped entirely. So in order to actually deliver 500m in APDs they need to develop a product for it first. Walmart is still pretty much their only major customer, the other one is greenbox that they co-own and that doesnt really have customers themselves yet. And if all of these challenges are solved, they are still one of many companies in the same space with 5-10% EBIT in the best case. That's great, dont get me wrong! But its far away from the lofty valuations of a pure software AI Scaleable. Anyway, just my thoughts. Would love to hear your analysis - i might be too much of a negative nancy. The market seems to love them, could well be that its just me who isnt seeing it.

81520529

The main difference though is that Meta is an advertising business with AI tailwinds not an AI businesses that’s a promising business. In my view, CapEx and finance leases increasing are reasonable strategic investments for a business doing 50 billion a quarter on %45 EBIT margin while also growing 20% year over year

lakaidm

If you look into the industry, you will realise that there are plenty of very strong competitors with very comparable solutions but a much broader market footprint out there. SYM is a stock that solely lives of the promise of exponential growth but without a plan to ever turn profitable. Sprinkle some vague “AI” over it (this is not a USP in the industry either) and here you go. They have exactly one customer that is also a large shareholder and any competitor of this customer will be very (!) wary of trusting their core business operation (which is supply chain) with symbotic. They have show that the pipeline they have (wouldn’t fully trust in that either btw) is not profitable and even if it ever becomes profitable, it will be in line with the industry which is somewhere between 5% and 10% EBIT. They are not unique as in “we can do it without the steel” and are less of a pure SW Player than others. Anyway, i have been watching them for a while now and know my way around the industry. i am wondering when they will crash. I don’t understand this one, maybe its me 🤷🏻‍♂️

thelastsubject123

their EBIT margin expanded from 2% to 23.4% in the past 12 months. OP is not saying it's a meaningless metric, it's more so it's impossible to gauge where RDDT's earnings will be in 1,2,3 years from now given that the E in PE is growing explosively. Given that gross margins are 90%, there is copious room for margins to expand and EPS to multiply

Jeff__Skilling

> but its the reason their financials look 10x better than anyone else in their industry, and THATS a red flag. Because they eliminated 17 - 7 - 15 = ($5mm) in intercompany EBIT? Or because they have $70MM in cash inflows due to NWC from related parties? I'm having a hard time seeing how this makes their financials look 10x better....

Always_Curious_One2

SMWB - 100% subscription revenues (half are Multi year), 80% gross margins and mid teens growth. They are a Key Data business that helps large global corporations understand their competitive position, and what their toughest competitors are doing. Their data is Unique as they collect Real Time every minute of every day the activity across global websites, browsers, mobile apps, search engines, and now generative AI driven traffic. These data are hugely valuable to enterprises from JNJ to Coke to JPM to S&P Global to Bloomberg to Google to Samsung to Apple to Disney to Eli Lilly … And the AI platforms also license SMWB data to perform their analytics. Operating margins are scaling Up as they grow their recurring revenues — with 25% EBIT (that’s right EBIT, not EBITDA) visible in the 4 year time frame. SMWB is not well covered (no one has estimates past 2027) — but with their unique data subscriptions growth and profit drop down they’ll be earning over $1 of Cash EPS in a 4 year time frame. They are not capital expenditures dependent. AI is actually helping them spend less on SG&A on the opex side. With their high margins, light capital requirements, and growing Recurring revenues — they should get at least a 20 multiple (many such businesses get 30X). So the stock should be $25-30 in a few years versus $7.45 now. Also, Adobe acquired SemRush (an SEO only company with less analytics than SMWB) for $1.9 billion in cash !! SMWB provides more value to clients, and is currently only a $618 million market cap - so an acquisition is a possibility. I am not pitching that as a preferred outcome but it sure does provide downside protection.

Key_Variety_6287

In God We trust, everyone else must bring data. Oracle is currently trading at 35 times EV/EBIT and has a negative FCF yield and Debt to EBITDA ratio of 4.64 Let's look at META in 2022, EV/EBIT of 9.70, FCF yield of 7.2% and Debt to EBITDA ratio of 0.58. The only similarity is that the fall in share price. One became sort cheap and the other is still very richly valued despite the fall.

No_Hour6830

10x in 5 years is tough, but I think Sea Limited has a good chance to 5x over the next 5 years, and 10x over the next 10 years. And unlike many stocks that are likely to be listed in this thread, downside risk is limited due to the scale they've already achieved. Shopee is already doing \~$125B in GMV for 2025. For a sense of scale, that's about double MercadoLibre. Their e-commerce market share in Southeast Asia is above 50%--that's greater than Amazon's US e-commerce market share of \~40%. The company is growing very quickly (38% YoY in Q3 2025), margins are expanding with a lot of room to expand further, management alignment is uniquely strong, and the company is dominant across all three main segments. Morningstar's current projections have the company growing their EBIT at a 37% CAGR over the next decade. If you assume only that, you get a 5-6x over the next ten years. But I believe Sea will find new, profitable sources of revenue by then which can't be accounted for. At the scale they've achieved, with strong profitability, and at the current valuation, medium to long term downside risk is minimal. Like I said, a 5-year 10x is highly unlikely. But a 5-year 5x is highly plausible, around the upper range of a bullish outcome. And a 10-year 10x is around the middle range of a bullish outcome in my view.

highchillerdeluxe

Literally every single indicator you can think of is deep red on tesla. Sales, profit, income, EPS, EBIT, P/E, you name it. The "echo chamber" is simply pointing out (and rightfully so) that this price rally makes absolutely no sense. The only reason one could argue against all this is an enormous future prospect, like robotaxis. But Tesla hasn't shown any substantial progress on any front what so ever during the past year. So yeah, I agree. It's pretty impossible to convince anybody that it is fair valued.

Artistic-Western6342

Ford's pivot from pure EVs to hybrids/extended-range EVs is a major strategic shift, impacting investors and commodity markets: Ford (F): Shares are around $13.65 - $13.75 today. The $19.5 billion charge for the EV pivot is a hit, but raising 2025 EBIT guidance to $7 billion signals investor confidence in a more profitable, diversified strategy. Lithium: Not falling out of favor. Battery-grade Lithium Carbonate is around 75,000 CNY/ton (approx. $12,011-$13,572 USD/mt). Prices have recently increased, with Chinese suppliers hiking by 15% due to demand from *all* electrified vehicles, including hybrids. Uranium: Currently at $78.40 per pound. Its demand is primarily tied to nuclear power, so Ford's automotive shift has little direct impact on its market. Oil: WTI Crude is around $55.96 - $56.23 per barrel; Brent around $60.30 per barrel. A move to hybrids/EREVs means continued gasoline consumption, potentially supporting oil demand compared to a full EV world, though global oversupply is a larger current factor.

ResidentRaccoon94

Dang so you’re not giving any credit towards EBIT? Or are you lying to us rn?

Frenchtickler424

but you said tariffs cut your EBIT in half while saying all the costs were being passed on....those statements don't mix well. in any case this is getting away from my original post that as a whole the inflationary effect has been minimal. The number reinforce that

Frenchtickler424

how do you pass along all costs to stellantis while simultaneously halving your EBIT?

Whiterhino77

As a controller for a tier 1 automotive manufacturer, tariffs have cut our EBIT in half. We’re charging all of this to Stellantis. What tf do you think they’re doing with that added cost? I’m always curious when I see your opinion

Key_Variety_6287

I am interested in Adobe but for some reason market has not discounted it enough to protect from downside. It still trades at an EV/EBIT of 16, which is in the fair value range. It may offer an upside but doesn’t offer downside protection. The other thing to note is that Adobe’s increase in revenue and profit were largely driven by an increase in of 25% or so in its prices not by increase in customer base. On the positive side, this establishes that they have a captive user base that (subset of their customers) who see no potential alternative at this stage. But Canva and others are eating their acquisition channel. And this presents a conundrum, how long can Adobe simply increase prices to grow revenue before it becomes unsustainable for customers? I don’t know. But that’s my thesis. And for that reason, I am hesitant to pull trigger at current valuation!

moazzam0

What do you think of the slight miss on Q2 EBIT guide

JimmyInvestor

a simple way to judge whether a stock is a real long-term investment is to look at three things: (i) unit economics, (ii) durability and (iii) valuation. I like to think about it this way *(it’s a mix of Buffett, Lynch, and Damodaran 😬😬):* **1. Unit Economics (Quality)** \> Start by checking whether the business actually creates value today. \> ROIC above WACC, solid incremental ROIC, a strong reinvestment rate and FCF per share trending up. \> If returns on capital stay high across cycles, the company has a real economic engine **2. Durability (Moat + Runway)** \> Does the company have a defendable position and space to grow? \> Look for switching costs, scale advantages, network effects, cost leadership or regulatory protection \> Check the TAM and whether the company is still early in its penetration curve. \> You want a business capable of sustaining high returns for 10 years (not 10 days) **3. Valuation (Price vs. Outcomes)** \> Use simple scenarios: bear, base, bull. \> Break down sources of return: earnings growth, FCF yield, multiple expansion or compression and dilution. \> Look at P/E (or EV/EBIT, EV/FCF) and ask: "What assumptions does the current price already assume?" \> If the market is pricing in perfection, your long-term returns will be capped regardless of quality. If the business (i) creates economic value, (ii) can defend it, and (iii) the price still offers a reasonable margin of safety, it usually works well for the long run... Hope this helps. btw, I recently wrote about the five investment frameworks that most professionals use, in my newsletter. I can send you the link if you’d like.

thelastsubject123

My comment from 7 months ago. Ironically, I underestimated their EBIT growth [https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1kh0b39/comment/mr38wi2/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1kh0b39/comment/mr38wi2/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) \>17 P/E, 15.5 Foward PE, 125B profit for 1.9T valuation, i'll take that price any day median + avg historical PE is 25, assume meager 15% EPS growth (which will be compounded with their future buybacks at low valuation), that's a 25% CAGR for next 5 years. no brainer buy. "but perplexity, chatgpt, etc", once they realize incinerating money is not a business model, suddenly the "dead business" that prints money faster than you can generate prompts looks pretty good

Inbetriebnahme

Love this company, but let's zoom out a bit on its chart: in the last 18 months, its price went from 14 cents to 60, and it was just 4 cents 28 months ago (so a price of 60 cents represents a 15x increase from there). While the revenue and profit increases of the last 18 months were undoubtedly impressive, I believe this growth rate was already priced in last year. For this stock to become a multi-bagger from the current price levels ($550M market cap), it would take a multi-billion dollar valuation, which would be hard to achieve without doubling or tripling their current EBIT. I have some doubts since the number of their employees only increased slightly (from 64 to 68) in the last 18 months. However, I am not an industry expert and thus I cannot validate how far they could go with their current lineup and capacities. Everyone expects an M&A since the CEO announced his clear plan for it. Realistically, I'd not expect the buyout price to significantly exceed $1B if it happened within the next 6-12 months (approx. $1 per share). With that said, I think it is a solid investment with very limited downside risk at the current price of $0.52. I just do not see the multi-bagger potential in it, at least not in the next 6-12 months. I am not a buyer at this level, but if the price drops below 30-40 cents again, it is clearly a no-brainer.

Reinbert

That actually doesn't seem all that much honestly... Also I think 12 million is only the packages in the US, right? So global it would be double. So they would save about 2,6 billion. So that would increase their EBIT by about... 2% I mean, it's not nothing but it also doesn't seem very significant.

AdWitty4949

This is the part FOMO ignores. Company debt: around $8–9B of total / long-term debt. Debt-to-equity: ~600%+. Interest coverage: EBIT doesn’t fully cover interest (ratio ~0.4x). Recent news: they’re negotiating debt restructuring, delaying filings, talking about potential defaults and asset sales. Everyone here has talked about how ambiguous they are on releasing this info. So shorts aren’t convinced, they’re betting that: The capital structure is broken. If there is a restructuring, equity could get diluted hard or wiped out, no matter what happens in a short-term spike. That’s important psychologically: if they believe fair value is close to zero, they can tolerate a move from $1.20 to 1.80 and even $3, without panicking or letting themselves get shorted out, especially if their borrow is locked in via long-term arrangements. Yes there’s been a squeeze ATTEMPT today, and yes shorts will have covered some. But we don’t know how much of that 60M short interest is gone vs. replaced by new shorts fading the spike. NFE definitely has some ingredients for further squeezey moves, but it is absolutely not a clean, low-float “they’re trapped and doomed” setup. It’s a high-risk, two-sided battleground. Could it rip another %50 - %100 on a headline and FOMO? Sure. Could it just as easily toilet on a nasty restructuring update and nuke late longs? Also yes. This is why I’m scared, I don’t want to risk my money and I realize I could have bought in when it was $1.29, I get that. But honestly this thing scares me. I’ll know more in the morning after opening if it’s running and has technical strength.

Glittering_Water3645

My pick currently is betsson AB PE 8,6. PE for 2026: 7,7 10-15% estimated EPS growth + 5% dividend EV/EBIT: 6 (superhealthy balance sheet) PEGY ratio of 0,4-0,5 Olympic games and world cup in football coming up soon.

Ebisure

EBIT takes into account depreciation. Earning Before Interest Tax. You are probably thinking of EBITDA.

No_Implement_5807

EBIT doesn't even take into account depreciation

Opening-Witness1785

Exceedingly rare, but I can confirm. Both PACS and Ensign have at least one building each that pulls in $1MM+ in EBIT. One in CA, one in AZ.

Ok_Importance9886

CRCL had pretty decent earnings , and CRWV is actually the only neocould posting 61% EBIT margins , rest neoclouds are either still making bitcoin or are still nuilding like NBIS. All coreweave needs is 5% more margin to achieve profits , and that is quite possible.

refugeebanker

$GM Is a Boomer Trap — Long Ford, Short GM Before Barclays conf next week **$**GM is the most over-owned boomer stock in autos right now. Retail’s chasing it because “Corvette has a manual again, bro!” as if that suddenly gives GM Ferrari margins. Meanwhile, Tesla’s out here renting FSD cars for $60 a day that smoke a Corvette on the motorway. Reality check: * GM’s product lineup is *ancient.* Silverado/Sierra = 2019 tech. Express van = 1996 relic. * Ford’s F-150 just got another full refresh, the Transit rules fleets, and both are tariff-protected cash cows. * GM’s Q3 pump was pull-forward demand + Ford’s aluminum fire. Those tailwinds die fast. * Cruise still burns billions, Ultium rollout is slow, and management will be grilled by hedge-fund PMs at the Barclays Auto conference next week. * Ford’s the real recovery story — cheap, hated, and temporarily supply-choked. **Smart money rotation:** long F, short GM. Crowded GM longs are about to meet a firing squad of analysts asking why they’re paying 8× EBIT for a company still selling 1990s vans. GM’s “peak cycle” moment is ending. Ford’s still early in its rebound. Watch the fade start once the conference Q&A hits — GM down 2–3 %, Ford flat-up.

thelastsubject123

\> * Operating margins have improved to 12% based on the latest Q4 report, and I’m assuming they’ll get to \~ 15–16% over time. If the invest heavily in marketing those margins would come under pressure. why are you assuming EBIT margins are so low? They have a gross of 72 which is admittedly low for a SaaS but operating leverage always improves with subscription companies. It would not be unrealistic to expect a terminal margin of 30-40% as is the case for most software companies as they reach scale

LostMyTurban

Exactly. EBITDA is relative measure of profit before and after capital influx. Really to see if your capital investments did anything. I wouldn't call it useless but I also wouldn't be holding myself high if my EBITDA was good but EBIT was negative. Retrospectively, same argument can be made about EBIT - while at the bottom level interest and taxes can't be controlled, you still need to account for it when reporting earnings....

mike_gundy666

People are not spending less money, just look at earnings. Expedia had their earnings yesterday and everything is up YoY. Gross bookings and revenue is up. | **Metric** | **Q3 2025** | **Q3 2024** | **Δ Y/Y** | |---------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|------------| | Booked room nights | 108.2 | 97.4 | 11% | | Gross bookings | $30,727 | $27,498 | 12% | | Revenue | $4,412 | $4,060 | 9% | | Operating income | $1,036 | $762 | 36% | | Net income attributable to Expedia Group | $959 | $684 | 40% | | Diluted earnings per share | $7.33 | $5.04 | 45% | | Adjusted EBITDA* | $1,449 | $1,250 | 16% | | Adjusted EBIT* | $1,134 | $892 | 27% | | Adjusted net income* | $962 | $809 | 19% | | Adjusted EPS* | $7.57 | $6.13 | 23% | | Net cash provided by operating activities | $(497) | $(1,493) | (67%) | | Free cash flow* | $(686) | $(1,687) | (59%) | People ARE spending more.

Koei7

> Apple has a low net debt to EBITDA ratio of only 0.31. And its EBIT covers its interest expense a whopping 673 times over. This is according to Yahoo Finance. So yes Apple has debt but is debt to earnings ratio is very low. Although the debt amount is ‘not low’, as of Sept 2024 it is at 106.6bn but it also has very good free cash flow. So in short, Apple will manage and will probably manage it very well. You can’t really expect a company like Apple to neglect all these.

Frequent_Optimist

GM now sees full-year EBIT in a range of $12 billion to $13 billion (previously $10 billion to $12.5 billion), with adjusted automotive free cash flow of $10 billion to $11 billion (previously $7.5 billion to $10 billion). It also forecast adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of $9.75 to $10.50 diluted (versus $8.25 to $10.00 before). Up 14+%

Substantial-Rip-2399

DFLI is unlikely to stop diluting its stock in the near term, given its ongoing financial challenges and reliance on equity offerings to fund operations. Dragonfly Energy Holdings Corp (DFLI) has aggressively pursued multiple underwritten public offerings in October 2025, issuing over 56 million shares at discounted prices—$1.25 and $1.35 per share respectively. These moves triggered sharp declines in share price, reflecting investor concern over severe dilution and the erosion of shareholder value. 🔍 Why the Dilution Continues • Cash Flow Deficit: DFLI reported negative operating cash flow of -$3.35M and free cash flow of -$4.20M, indicating it cannot sustain operations without external funding. • Heavy Liabilities: The company holds $88.38M in total liabilities against negative common stock equity of -$16.60M, underscoring a fragile balance sheet. • Profitability Issues: Despite a modest gross margin of 25.6%, DFLI’s EBIT margin sits at -39.3% and net profit margin at -55.84%, suggesting deep operational inefficiencies. • Dilution Strategy: The recent offerings included pre-funded warrants, signaling a continued intent to raise capital through equity rather than debt. 📈 Is There a Path to Stability? While DFLI has shown some revenue growth (26% YoY forecasted for Q3) and formed strategic partnerships (e.g., PACCAR, Nevada Tech Hub funding), these developments have yet to offset its financial instability. Unless the company achieves sustained profitability and positive cash flow, further dilution remains a likely tool to maintain liquidity and fund expansion. May be time to take what you have and run

Th1rt13n

Wdym expensive. They’re now the cheapest ever by EV EBIT lmao

Den923

According to Grok - Decibel has better growth potential than Auxly, thanks to its Moderate Buy analyst rating, a projected 93% stock price upside to C$0.27 from C$0.14, and guidance for C$20M in free cash flow for 2025 amid strong Q2 growth. In contrast, Auxly holds a Hold rating with a modest 46% average upside to C$0.19 and a forecasted negative EBIT of -C$7M.

Kirko_Cousins

Adjusted EBIT at $537K for a $10B cap? Calls on APLD.

EveryPassage

How does that $141B number and the total debt of these companies compare to their EBIT?

TheBayWeigh

Magic Signal Analysis for GRRR Major Institutional Ownership Surge: Institutional ownership jumped by 115.63% in the last quarter, and institutional owners increased 15.38%. This strong buying from large investors often signals conviction in the company’s long-term prospects. Price Target Significantly Raised: The average one-year price target was recently lifted 28.07% to $37.23, representing a 91.22% implied upside from the last close. Analyst sentiment is materially positive. Landmark Strategic Deal: Shares surged 13% after announcing a $1.4 billion partnership with Freyr in Southeast Asia, materially increasing the company’s forward revenue pipeline. Earnings Highlight Persistent Losses: Despite topline growth, the latest earnings show a net loss of $64.79 million, negative $16 million EBIT, and negative $66 million EBITDA, highlighting ongoing operational challenges. High Volatility & Options Activity: Implied volatility remains extremely high (92.2%), with bullish options positioning (put/call OI ratio 0.33) and rising call volume and open interest. Upcoming Catalyst: The next earnings release (November 13, 2025) is expected to serve as an inflection point for investor sentiment. Technical Analysis: Indicator Value Signal RSI (14-period) 40.61 Neutral SMA (20-period) $18.99 Bearish (Current < SMA) Price vs. SMA (20) -3.06% Bearish MACD -0.2605 Bearish momentum MACD Signal Line -0.2096 MACD Histogram -0.0509 Bearish divergence Put/Call Ratio (OI) 0.33 Bullish positioning Implied Volatility (30d) 92.20% Very High Realized Volatility 66.30% High Interpretation: The overall technical setup is currently neutral to bearish, with the price trading below the short-term SMA and MACD signals pointing toward strengthening negative momentum. However, options flow is decidedly bullish, with heavy call Open Interest (75.2% of total OI) and a low put/call ratio, indicating traders expect potential upside or volatility to the upside. RSI at 40.61 suggests the stock is not oversold, but is moving closer to potential support levels where reversal interest may emerge. Extremely high implied volatility signals a market expecting large price swings; this could be supportive for traders exploiting volatility or positioning for a potential upward catalyst. Market Analysis: Year-to-Date Performance: Shares are down -5.93% YTD, trailing the technology sector index averages and reflecting both sector-wide pressures and company-specific execution questions. 52-Week Trading Range: The stock has seen extreme volatility, trading between $3.71 and $44.15 in the past year—a 12x swing highlighting both opportunities and risks for active investors. Sector Dynamics: GRRR competes in the Technology sector with a focus on AI, cybersecurity, and smart infrastructure. These are high-growth spaces, but also fiercely competitive, with established players and emerging disruptors. Valuation Multiples: Trading at a price-to-sales of 5.05 and price-to-book of 3.84, GRRR is being valued at a growth premium, despite negative earnings and lack of dividend policy. Investment Outlook: Short-term (1-3 months): NEUTRAL | Confidence: 55% Bullish institutional positioning and raised analyst targets create a positive bias, particularly if momentum from the Southeast Asia deal sustains. However, technicals are still weak, and volatility is high, suggesting rangebound action until a decisive catalyst appears. Upcoming earnings (Nov 13) remain a make-or-break event: a positive surprise on margins or deal execution could swing sentiment decisively bullish. Medium-term (3-12 months): BULLISH | Confidence: 70% The closing and ramp-up of the $1.4B deal and evidence of improving sales execution could drive material rerating. Institutional accumulation and analyst optimism are likely to support valuation, provided the company shows progress toward profitability or operating leverage. Long-term sector tailwinds in AI analytics and security, plus prior price target upgrades, suggest higher conviction for positive revaluation as new contracts contribute to topline growth. Risk Assessment: Continued Losses & Cash Burn: Persistent net losses and negative EBITDA highlight the need for effective cost control and margin improvement. Dilution risk or capital raise is present if losses persist longer than expected. Execution Risk on Major Deals: The $1.4 billion contract remains a key test. Failure to deliver, delays, or changes in terms could cause sharp downside. Volatility and Liquidity: With extremely high implied and realized volatility, and a thin float, GRRR may be subject to significant price swings that may not always be fully explained by fundamentals. Competitive Pressure: Technology sector competition is intense—failure to innovate or loss of market share could impair growth outlook. Limited Track Record/Public History: As a recent addition to US markets, the company’s ability to reliably execute in the public eye has yet to be fully demonstrated.

ICantBeliveUDoneThis

You sound ignorant fyi. PE should never ever be used for new companies or companies that are barely profitable. Reddit just became profitable in the last year. There are good reasons you only hear people talk about the PE ratio of the S&P500 and not the Russell 2000. When revenue is small, fixed costs eat up nearly all the earnings. Once revenue scales past a certain threshold, those fixed costs barely move while revenue keeps increasing so margin expands quickly. Example with totally made up numbers: Company has $10M fixed costs and 30% gross margin. At $40M revenue → gross profit $12M → EBIT only $2M. At $60M revenue → gross profit $18M → EBIT $8M. Revenue up 50%, EBIT up 300%. Assume: share price = $20 Shares outstanding = 10M EBIT at $40M revenue = $2M EBIT at $60M revenue = $8M ignore taxes/interest so EBIT ≈ Net Income. EPS Before Growth: Net Income = $2M EPS = $2M ÷ 10M = $0.20 PE = $20 ÷ $0.20 = 100x EPS After Growth: Net Income = $8M EPS = $8M ÷ 10M = $0.80 PE = $20 ÷ $0.80 = 25x So a realistic 50% revenue increase would drop the PE from 100 to 25.

XxXSparkyXxX4

Qfin finv xyf jfin. But i dont expect much out of them in the short turn (some new regulations going to cause them to lose ~15-30% of EBIT, in next 2 quarters). They are just unfairly cheap and buying back shares. Imo they should trade at 8x net income, Not 2-4

EAS893

It might be recency bias. I agree that lower price relative to expected future cash flows will always indicate a value premium, but I think we both know that the way most funds try to measure value is usually not through a rigorous DCF calculation but rather by looking at multiples (like P/E, P/B, P/S, EBIT/EV etc...) This usually works in aggregate, because growth rates tend to mean revert, or at least they have in the past as competition erodes competitive moats, so a higher multiple usually means that growth has been over forecasted. I just think we have to acknowledge the possibility that this mean reversion effect might not exist for the current crop of mega cap growth firms. Not just because of recency bias but because of fundamental differences in the way these firms' businesses operate as compared to how firms that have historically dominated the market have operated. This might mean that both the "easy" multiple based approach for tracking "value" AND a traditional DCF (even multi stage), which usually assumes reversion to the mean in both growth and profitability over time, might underestimate intrinsic value for these kinds of firms. I'm not saying this is 100% the case (in fact, I think it likely that it is NOT the case over a very long term time horizon). I'm just saying that if you isolate that segment of the market (represented by MGK here) and hold it in proportion to its weight in the market (where the market is represented by VT) you can effectively hedge this possibility while seeking a traditional value based approach in the rest of your portfolio. I'm not personally currently operating my own portfolio this way, and I think it needs a lot more rigorous analysis before anyone should consider doing something like that. I just think it's an interesting idea to ponder and based on my initial "back of the napkin" analysis that suggests the approach might have held some premium over the past decade might warrant further investigation to confirm or deny if it holds any value over the long term.

DefiantZealot

The problem with Comcast is that its internal growth is anemic. Look at its EBIT compounding rate and compare that to the inflation rate. It’s barely keeping pace. As a general rule of thumb, I try to avoid companies that can’t outperform the inflation rate because it leaves a very slim margin to absorb downturns. That being said its current valuation is egregiously low. Just from a liquidation perspective alone it should be fetching a much higher valuation. But that alone is not a reason to invest right now.

MikeZZZ23

Looking at their 2024 EBIT, \~3/4 came from gain on sale of ABS to investors. The amazing thing (weird though) is that they can easily sell shitty nonprime loan to customers.

slimkay

Except that top line growth is slowing down, with negative comparable growth in its key market (US), and both gross and EBIT margins have been contracting, reflecting higher markdowns, higher cost of opening/operating stores. LULU is quite exposed to the recent Trump Admin position on ending the de minimis exemption which will increase the cost of its e-commerce goods in the US (as 60% of US e-commerce sales are actually shipped from Canada).

fredditf

$NVDA Q2'26 Earnings Highlights 🔹 Revenue: $46.74B (Est. $46.23B) 🟢; UP +56% YoY 🔹 Adj EPS: $1.05 (Est. $1.01) 🟢; UP +54% YoY 🔹 Adj Gross Margin: 72.7% (Est. 72.1%) 🟢 🔹 Data Center Revenue: $41.1B (Est. $41.25B) 🟡; UP +56% YoY Q3 Guidance: 🔹 Revenue: $54.0B ±2% (Est. $52.5B) 🟢; UP ~15% QoQ 🔹 Gross Margin (Adj): ~73.5% (±50bps) 🔹 OpEx: ~$4.2B (Adj) Segment Results: 🔹 Blackwell revenue +17% QoQ 🔹 Compute Revenue: $34.1B (Est. $34.10B) 🟡 🔹 Networking Revenue: $5.07B (Est. $5.07B) 🟡 🔹 Gaming Revenue: $4.3B; UP +49% YoY 🔹 Professional Visualization: $601M; UP +32% YoY 🔹 Automotive: $586M (Est. $592.7M) 🔴; UP +69% YoY Other Q2 Metrics: 🔹 Operating Income (Adj): $30.17B (Est. $29.36B) 🟢; UP +51% YoY 🔹 Operating Expenses (Adj): $3.80B (Est. $4.02B) 🟢; UP +36% YoY 🔹 Net Income (Adj): $25.78B; UP +52% YoY Profitability & Cash Flow: 🔹 EBIT: $28.44B (Est. $28.97B) 🔴 🔹 Free Cash Flow: Mid-$20Bs (prior $26.1B) 🔹 Returned $24.3B to shareholders H1’26 🔹 Share repurchase authorization expanded by $60B CEO Commentary 🔸 “Blackwell is the AI platform the world has been waiting for — demand is extraordinary as reasoning AI drives massive increases in training and inference performance.” – Jensen Huang, CEO