SEB raises its fair value range in its latest report:
" Booming trends drive growth
Q1 adjusted EBITDA was clearly higher and adjustment items significantly lower than we forecast. We raise adj. EBITDA by 3% and reported EBITDA by 38% for FY/26E. Growing order book and booming data centre demand will drive growth in the coming quarters and years, we expect. We raise our fair value range to EUR 4.5-6.5 (3.5-5.5). The shares trade at 2026E-28E EV/EBITDA of 4.8-3.5x, which does not reflect current potential, we argue."
Nordea is not adjusting its estimate of fair value, but their latest comments can be found here:
"Relatively good visibility for 2026
Q1 net sales and adjusted EBITDA were slightly below our expectations. Comparable revenue growth was -2% in Q1 y/y, but the orderbook grew by 5% q/q. Adjusted EBITDA for the core operations in 2026 is still guided at EUR 19-23m, which we consider realistic. For this year, we forecast adjusted EBITDA of EUR 20m and revenue growth of 5.9%. Data centres could offer notable growth for Enersense in the medium term, as construction of data centres requires energy infrastructure and telecommunication solutions. The company upgraded its medium-term growth target to 6-7% (previously: 4- 5%). Our fair value range remains at EUR 4.2-5.3, based on our DCF analysis and backed by a peer group comparison"
Aapeli reiterates Buy rating and raises target price from €4.9 → €5.2
Enersense’s Q1 operating result exceeded our forecasts during the seasonally quietest quarter. The company made no changes to its earnings guidance for the current year, but raised its growth target for the strategy period on the earnings day. In our view, this strengthens confidence in the company’s medium-term market outlook. Consequently, we raised our revenue forecasts for the coming years, though they remain below the target level. We believe the expected return, driven by earnings growth over the next few years, remains at a very attractive level, reflecting which we reiterate our buy rating on the stock. Following the forecast changes, we revise our target price back to EUR 5.2 (previously EUR 4.9).
Quite a good result overall; even for the weaker points, there were sensible explanations regarding delays in permitting. The Data Center unit is starting to move forward, and the pipeline for data centers in Finland will surely benefit Enersense as well. Owners are increasing their positions, and the board along with them. All in all, several pieces of news are on the positive side. Will it be bought out before it truly gains momentum on the stock exchange?
When I was looking at Enersense’s board of directors on their website, I noticed Anna Miettinen is indeed there. However, it says the following about her: “Independent of the company and significant shareholders.”
I don’t know much about these matters, but that seems a bit strange to me, because further down it says:
“Primary occupation: Member of the Board, Ensto Invest Oy”
So she is on the board of the second-largest owner, which is also their family company?
Is it really the case that the purchases made by Ensto Invest do not need to be reported as insider trades? Do they only appear if a flagging notification (liputusilmoitus) must be made, like now, or at the beginning of the following month when new ownership amounts are reported?
Does this mean Ensto Invest doesn’t need to care about closed windows, even though they have a representative on Enersense’s board?
However, for the Chairman of the Board of Enersense, it says:
“Independent of the company, but dependent on significant shareholders”
“Day job” and “main occupation” certainly sound like the exact same thing . Okay. One of them could be a position of trust. By the way, what is your take on the matter if we leave the Chairman of the Board of Enersense out of it?
I thought I’d circle back after a short delay regarding the results and financial expenses. This is a bit of a “stand down” compared to my previous comment. As Kari mentioned in the video, the reported financial expenses were increased by EUR 0.8 million due to a non-cash entry. Thus, the cash-flow-based financial expenses were fairly well in line with our expectations (approx. EUR 1.1m vs. est. EUR 1.2m). On the other hand, the interest on the hybrid bond is deducted directly from EPS as I expected (and will be deducted going forward). These had been omitted from the company’s reported EPS published in the morning, but a correction announcement regarding this was released on Thursday evening. So, excluding non-cash items, the performance was well in line with our forecasts. However, based on the company’s comments, these items may continue to cause volatility in reported financial expenses in the future.
I can answer this on my behalf as well. Regarding contract terms or the exact structure of the order backlog, these are difficult to say for sure or know precisely from the outside. However, my understanding is that Enersense did its homework during the previous inflation cycle regarding contract terms and procurement policy, just like all other operators. Therefore, for example, passing inflation onto prices should be more flexible than before for most contracts, at least to some extent (there are certainly differences, at least regarding longer framework agreements). At the same time, regarding projects, my understanding is that an even larger part of procurement is aimed to be locked in already at the contract stage, for example, regarding subcontractors or materials. Additionally, some of those materials are more pass-through (e.g., batteries), although some kind of margin is certainly taken on these too. From what I’ve discussed with the company management, contract terms and project selection have been high on the priority list from the start, in addition to other measures taken and underway. Typically, high demand also brings more bargaining power in terms of pricing, which is currently present especially in Power and also partly in Connectivity. Even after all this, I still believe there is a certain risk involved, especially if the situation persists and inflation rises, or if potential logistical bottlenecks emerge, particularly regarding how far the contracts flex and how quickly. Considering the overall picture, I did not make any material changes to the forecasts for the rest of the year despite the report exceeding expectations. It’s also good to note, and not just regarding Enersense, that practically all operators across different sectors are commenting that lessons were learned last time, but time will tell how everyone has succeeded in this.
Some slightly provocative questions for the Enersense Roast (@Verneri_Pulkkinen):
What is the role of the P2X investment in the future? Currently, it is accounted for as an investment, so is the investment for sale if the price is right? Or does Enersense also gain some operational benefit from the investment?
Why is the net gearing target still as high as 85%? For a retail investor, it easily feels like the company’s main owners—who are very likely the creditors of the hybrid loan—are trying to use this to compensate for a failed investment (as their purchase prices are largely significantly higher than the current price). In connection with its last report, Enersense also changed its strategic targets regarding profitability: the EBIT target was changed to an EBITDA target; is the intention to keep Enersense’s EPS negative in the future as well?
Should Enersense be rebranded? Although the company’s turnaround has progressed well so far, it seems that the company still has a somewhat poor reputation, at least among investors. The company has already proven to be a bad investment twice. The time on the First North list as a staff leasing company hardly evokes good memories for anyone. And then, after the acquisition of Empower, the company tried to become an energy producer, and nothing came of that either. Is this historical baggage also reflected in customer relationships? Or is this just a “positive problem” for a value investor; you can get the company at a discount relative to its operational quality.
Is there anything left of the old Enersense from before the Empower acquisition besides the name and the headquarters in Pori? Does the company’s business consist solely of the former Empower operations and their organic expansions?
Insiders are showing an appetite for Enersense shares at the current valuation. Today, a notification was released regarding purchases by Board Member Åsa Neving. She serves as the CFO at Nobina:
You could ask if there are any consolidation opportunities in the industry? Some international company might be interested in Enersense to expand their business, or perhaps other Finnish infrastructure builders. A lot of data centers are being built, and their maintenance operations can be a decent business. The same goes for power grids and maintenance contracts like those with Helen. What is the status of the hydrogen projects, and aren’t they likely the only builder who has constructed a production plant for P2X?
Aapeli already answered earlier on his behalf regarding the effects of cost inflation on Enersense, but if the question fits the Roast concept, I would also like to hear Kari’s perspective on the subject @Verneri_Pulkkinen
Here are Tommi’s comments as Betolar and Enersense begin cooperation to protect substations
Betolar announced on Friday that it has signed a letter of intent (LoI) with Enersense for commercial cooperation to protect substations from external threats, such as drones. We view the partnership as a positive step, as Enersense brings much-needed credibility and delivery capability to the protection solution announced by the company in April. Although the changed security environment may create a rapidly growing niche for the solution, we do not see pressure to change our forecasts based on the announcement, as commercialization is only in its early stages. This is also supported by the significant revenue growth we have forecasted for 2027, which requires success in the commercialization of Betolar’s technology.
There were high-quality questions and it was a good roast overall. Thanks for that and also for including my question @Verneri_Pulkkinen !
It might have been a bit of a slip of the tongue, but when discussing indebtedness, Kari stated that “Targets must be such that they will definitely be achieved.” To my ears, those sound like targets that might be a bit too easy
The Roast certainly reinforced my own feelings that Enersense is now at a very interesting stage in a growing industry, and the created lifecycle strategy looks good on paper—now we just wait for those practical results. As well as those share purchases from Kari
Funny thing, I was just wondering the same thing about that comment. Perhaps it’s more strongly related to the fact that the company is carrying quite a bit of historical baggage, which is why even a minor miss on targets is bound to be overinterpreted by the market. Maybe it’s better this way: build trust by hitting targets first, and then set more ambitious goals later once there is stronger market confidence in the execution.
. Okay. One of them could be a position of trust. By the way, what is your take on the matter if we leave the Chairman of the Board of Enersense out of it?
!
