contentSlug

type

ContentSlug_ContentQuery

slug

ContentPageContentQuery

content

trendingContent

query ContentSlug_ContentQuery(
  $contentSlug: String!
  $type: [ContentType!]
) {
  ...ContentPageContentQuery_13QmVO
}

fragment CompanyDetails_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  companies {
    name
    description
    pageUrl
    id
  }
}

fragment ContentBasicInfo on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  id
  type
  title
  lang
  companies {
    viewerIsFollowing
    id
    name
    pageUrl
  }
  tags {
    viewerIsFollowing
    id
    name
    pageUrl
  }
  ...PublishingDetails
  ...Reactions
}

fragment ContentMetadata on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  type
  title
  lang
  pageUrl
  alternatePageUrls: translations {
    __typename
    pageUrl
    lang
  }
  imgUrl
  description
  ... on Video {
    liveTime
    videoUrl
  }
  ... on Webcast {
    liveTime
    videoUrl
  }
}

fragment ContentPageContentQuery_13QmVO on Query {
  content(slug: $contentSlug, type: $type) {
    __typename
    id
    type
    title
    isPremium
    lang
    htmlBody
    summary
    companies {
      forum {
        latestPosts {
          ...ForumPosts
        }
      }
      name
      id
      viewerIsFollowing
      pageUrl
      defaultInstrument {
        isin
        id
        marketOpen
        marketClose
        marketplace {
          region
        }
        returns {
          total
        }
      }
    }
    tags {
      viewerIsFollowing
      id
      name
      pageUrl
    }
    createdAt
    ... on Video {
      liveTime
    }
    ... on Webcast {
      liveTime
    }
    slug
    ... on CompanyReport {
      reportUrl
    }
    ... on ThirdPartyCompanyReport {
      reportUrl
    }
    ... on StockExchangeRelease {
      reportUrl
    }
    ...ContentBasicInfo
    ...ContentMetadata
    ...PriceAndRecommendation_Content
    ...CompanyDetails_Content
    ...ReportLink_Content
    ...KeyFigures_Content
  }
  ...TrendingContent_1jQ2Cn
}

fragment ForumPosts on ForumPost {
  text
  likesCount
  url
  author
  postedAt
  authorImgUrl
}

fragment KeyFigures_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  companies {
    defaultInstrument {
      estimateData {
        modelType
        reportingCurrency
      }
      snapshot {
        transaction {
          date
          actualized {
            year
            quarter
            revenue
            revenueGrowth
            ebitAdjusted
            ebitReported
            ebitda
            enterpriseValue
            epsAdjusted
            dividend
            dividendYield
            sharePrice
          }
          estimates {
            year
            quarter
            revenue
            revenueGrowth
            ebitAdjusted
            ebitReported
            ebitda
            enterpriseValue
            epsAdjusted
            dividend
            dividendYield
            sharePrice
          }
        }
      }
      id
    }
    id
  }
}

fragment PriceAndRecommendation_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  createdAt
  companies {
    name
    pageUrl
    defaultInstrument {
      priceData {
        tradeCurrency
      }
      snapshot {
        priceData {
          date
          lastPrice
          tradeCurrency
        }
        transaction {
          date
          recommendation
          targetPrice
        }
        prevTransaction {
          recommendation
        }
      }
      id
    }
    id
  }
}

fragment PublishingDetails on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  createdAt
  publishers {
    name
    imgUrl
  }
  authors {
    __typename
    id
    name
    slug
    imgUrl
    jobTitle
  }
  ... on Video {
    liveTime
  }
  ... on Webcast {
    liveTime
  }
}

fragment Reactions on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  id
  reactionGroups {
    reactionType
    reactionsCount
    viewerReacted
  }
}

fragment ReportLink_Content on Content {
  __isContent: __typename
  type
  isPremium
  ... on CompanyReport {
    reportUrl
  }
  ... on ThirdPartyCompanyReport {
    reportUrl
  }
  ... on StockExchangeRelease {
    reportUrl
  }
}

fragment TrendingContent_1jQ2Cn on Query {
  trendingContent(type: ARTICLE) {
    __typename
    id
    title
    lang
    pageUrl
    createdAt
    type
    imgUrl
    companies {
      squareLogoUrl
      name
      id
    }
    authors {
      __typename
      imgUrl
      id
    }
    publishers {
      imgUrl
    }
  }
}


__typename

title

isPremium

lang

htmlBody

summary

companies

createdAt

publishers

authors

reactionGroups

pageUrl

translations

imgUrl

description

Saab is active in the defense and aerospace industry and focuses on the development, manufacture and distribution of defense and security systems. The company's products include fighter aircraft, radar and surveillance systems. The operations are global with a primary presence in Europe, North America and Asia. Saab was founded in 1937 and is headquartered in Stockholm.

Excellent reflection on a difficult question! I see fairly similar high sentiment-driven valuation levels in other European defense/war stocks as well. Perhaps they are a unique manifestation of the will to defend, who knows.

Thank you for the discussion! We’ll have to wait and see what our stance on the fair value is when we publish updated estimates And, yes, reverse DCF is a good tool, specially when you see a company with a valuation that has gone up fast in a short period of time. The reason is because value generation by firms does not work like that. It is a much slower process.

Thanks for the comment. Of course, I don’t buy stocks impulsively based solely on the target price, even though my post yesterday might have suggested that when I was asking about the logic behind the target price. I also strive to familiarize myself with companies through their financials, products, history, and the market before making any decisions. Saab is no exception to this. Downplaying the target price as “just the end product of the analysis” is an interesting perspective in itself. I understand that the analysis is a whole and the target price + recommendation are its summary, but that’s exactly why it should be particularly important. I see the target price and the recommendation as the summary of the analysis, and these should naturally be in line with each other. The outcome is, after all, what the analyst uses to take a stand on whether they believe the stock is attractive or not. If the outcome of the analysis isn’t significant, then why is the analysis being done in the first place? And as for that “profound expertise,” that’s exactly what an investor does—going through the company’s order backlog, margins, cash flow, competitive position, product mix, technology, and strategy. In this case, my question didn’t concern these details, but a much simpler matter: why does Inderes’ target price (310 SEK) deviate so drastically from the market price (~600 SEK) and the levels of other analysts (closer to 700 SEK)? That was the reason why I originally started questioning it yesterday. So, I’m still not claiming to know the “correct” price for Saab—definitely not. However, perhaps I know whether it’s worth putting on my “buy, hold, or sell pants” right now. But when one analyst is at 300 and others are at 600–700, I think it’s perfectly justified to ask where such a large difference comes from. That’s what I was trying to figure out yesterday, and I don’t think I did so in an unreasonable manner.

The easiest way to find differences of opinion to compare is in the analysis itself. The target price is, after all, only the end product of the analysis. If you strongly disagree with an assumption or forecast in the analysis, you can mirror this against the target price, for example, as follows: Person X reads the analysis and agrees with the analyst on the development of revenue and the order book, but believes the analyst is underestimating the development of margins as capacity utilization increases and the product mix shifts toward digital products. X’s conclusion is then that their own target price is higher than the one given by the analyst. It is then a matter of more advanced expertise to determine how much the target price should increase and whether it justifies a buy decision when the current share price is already well above the analyst’s target. It is easier in situations where you feel the analyst is too pessimistic and the target price is already slightly higher than the current share price.

Thanks for the reply. I used to have a Saab 96, also known as the “kajakki” (kayak). I wasn’t happy with it at all. As an amateur, I admit that I’ve surely fallen for exactly that “superficial chart-staring” you warned about. I’m not claiming to know at all what the correct price for Saab’s stock should be, nor would I know how to calculate a reverse DCF, even though I probably should. That’s probably why this 310 SEK target price has felt so exotic to me. You mentioned that the target price is ”old data,” but on the other hand, a recent analysis states that there is no need for estimate upgrades. Does this mean that 310 SEK would, in your opinion, be pretty much on point? But I don’t want to harp on about it anymore. I appreciate you explaining your thinking so thoroughly. I will continue practicing and try to learn to look at more than just the price chart, even though it is the easiest tool for me.

Hey jokuvaan1. Thanks for the point of view. In the medium- and long-term, the stock price will not be decided by whatever headline is dominating the geopolitics tape, or by what people/governments say their intentions are. It will be decided by raw cash flow, especially in names that have benefited from heavy media coverage and a bit of narrative momentum. For Saab, the discussion is much more operational than rhetorical. Management is guiding for ~20-24% organic sales growth, and sustaining that kind of growth for multiple years is a capacity problem first, and a pricing story second. Saab has to physically produce more, which means scaling output inside a defense supply chain that is tightly regulated and slow to expand because suppliers must be qualified, security requirements must be met, and documentation and approvals are non trivial. This is not mainly a case of Saab simply hiking prices, producing more and letting the income statement do the work. The hard part is throughput. It is a very hard thing to balance.

Let’s unpack how I’m thinking about this. Honestly, thanks for pushing me on this. It makes me thing deeply about things because I have to explain them. First, disclosure: I do not own Saab, so I am less exposed to the classic “anchor” problem where your entry price, prior highs, or a round number becomes a reference point that quietly steers your judgement. That anchoring effect is very well documented in behavioral research. Still, having a view at all introduces bias, so I try to lean on explicit assumptions and basic valuation math rather than “vibes”. Also note that I have not updated my estimates ahead of the Q4’25 report. What sits in my model right now is still the post Q3’25 information set. On the idea that “the stock is above 500 SEK”: that is too superficial to be analytically useful. Price is what people are trading at today. Not even the most rational current shareholder would sell their beloved ~620 SEK Saab stock at 300-400 because it is the intrinsic value today. The price chart does not tell us whether fundamentals justify that price. Looking at a chart and concluding “it went up, therefore it is correct” is not an argument you can defend. Markets can be directionally right and still wrong on magnitude. On your point that “>500 SEK is where it has traded for a long time”: same issue. A long time at a given price does not validate the price. It only tells you that, for a period, enough buyers and sellers met there. That is real, but it is not the same as fair value. So let’s talk about actual pricing rather than levels on a chart. Saab trades at ~44x P E on our 2026 estimates. In our framework, a more reasonable long-term multiple for a mature government exposed prime is ~20-22x P/E, which is roughly half the current valuation and broadly consistent with our DCF work. The logic is simple. The government customers give you scale, duration, and strategic stickiness, but they also cap profitability and limit the ceiling on long run returns on capital. You are not selling subscriptions to teenagers. You are selling capability to parliaments. If multiples normalize, it does not require “Europe stops rearming.” It only requires the market’s expectations for sector cash flow conversion to cool from peak narrative toward something more boring. Media attention rotates, the marginal buyer becomes less momentum driven, and the valuation rerates toward a more normal risk adjusted return. That rerating risk is real in any capital goods sector, even in a strong demand cycle. For the detailed assumptions, the initiation report from September 2025 is the place to look. It lays out the DCF and the operating assumptions. You will also see that I am already quite optimistic on working capital management, which is one of the harder parts of this sector in practice. What would be valuable to you there are the sections for estimates and valuation. On the “war economics” phrase, I used it “for lack of a better analogy”. If you run a simple reverse DCF, the question becomes: what growth in free cash flow is the current price implicitly assuming? Reverse DCFs are a standard way to translate price into embedded expectations. On my 3% terminal growth and 8% WACC, the implied free cash flow CAGR comes out at roughly ~40% off a LTM free cash flow base of ~1 BSEK, using the company’s own definition. You can sanity check what that means: compounding 1 BSEK at 40% for 10 years gets you to ~29 BSEK, which is outrageous. To make it clear, that is not a forecast, it is the kind of expectation you need to rationalize the current price if you bake in optimistic margins and conversion. That is why I call the valuation structurally difficult to defend. The bottom line is that I am not claiming precision. I do not think value is a single point estimate, which is exactly why target prices should be read as rough centers of gravity, not truths. But directionally, on the current information set, I think the stock is priced for a cash flow outcome that is very hard to achieve without everything going right for a long time. Now, for the sake of discussion, let me ask you a question: do you think Saab is fairly priced right now?

Saab

Saab har fått en order på det passiva sensorsystemet Sirius för signalspaning (SIGINT) och övervakning inklusive tillhörande tjänster, från ett europeiskt NATO-land. Ordervärdet uppgår till ...

<div class="abstract">Saab har fått en order på det passiva sensorsystemet Sirius för signalspaning (SIGINT) och övervakning inklusive tillhörande tjänster, från ett europeiskt NATO-land. Ordervärdet uppgår till cirka 130 miljoner euro med leveranser fram till och med 2030.&nbsp;&nbsp;</div>Sirius sensorsystem ger användaren en omfattande övervaknings- och underrättelseförmåga. Sensorer för kommunikationsunderrättelser (COMINT) och elektroniska underrättelser (ELINT) kombineras till ett system för både taktisk situationsmedvetenhet och strategisk underrättelseinhämtning.&nbsp;− Vi är glada över att bidra till att stärka Europas och NATO:s förmåga att skapa en bättre lägesbild och samla in tillförlitliga underrättelser. God kunskap om omvärlden är en grundläggande förutsättning för välgrundade beslut, säger Carl-Johan Bergholm, chef för Saabs affärsområde Surveillance.&nbsp;Sirius är Saabs produktfamilj för passiv övervakning och signalspaning inom luft, land, och sjö och ger en förbättrad lägesbild över samtliga domäner och möjliggör gemensamma signalspaningsinsatser.&nbsp;KontaktSaabs presscenter +46 (0)734 180 018 presscentre@saabgroup.com&nbsp; &nbsp;Saab är ett ledande försvars- och säkerhetsföretag med uppdrag att hjälpa nationer att skydda sin befolkning och bidrar till trygghet för människor och samhällen. Med 27 000 talangfulla medarbetare utvecklar Saab teknik och lösningar för en säkrare och mer hållbar värld. Saab utvecklar, tillverkar och underhåller avancerade system inom flygteknik, vapen, ledningssystem, sensorer och undervattenssystem. Saab har sitt huvudkontor i Sverige men en global verksamhet där Saab är en del av många nationers försvarsförmåga. &nbsp;<div></div>