Portfolio Report - Q2 - 2025 ![]()
Introduction to the Report
Hi there!
I follow the development of my portfolio, established about five years ago, on a quarterly basis in a slightly more thoroughly written format. The content of a piece intended as a forum post can easily become a superficial scratch of the surface or a couple of sentences of shouting, which is why I aim to delve as deeply as possible into my own thoughts and topics of interest alongside the portfolio review. This helps me, and hopefully others too, to develop as an investor and find new perspectives on old ideas.
As a stock investor, I favor high-quality publicly traded companies that pay growing and sustainable dividends, broadly diversified. Preferably, a company should have a good return on equity and be financially sound. I prefer defensive businesses, and the more boring the business, the better. Of these, sustainable dividend-paying capacity is perhaps the most significant single characteristic of a publicly traded company for me.
For a long-term owner, a dividend is the only way to generate cash flow from their investment activities without unnecessary tricks. Mere price appreciation can be an uncertain return if you intend to hold, or are forced to hold, your ownership for, say, 5-10 years. In such a case, the total return of your investment is entirely at the mercy of market sentiment and the mood of other investors. This is not a researched fact, but I believe that the valuation of a non-dividend-paying public company is not as firmly anchored to any concrete fundamental, which makes such a company a more volatile investment target. The amount of a dividend paid also cannot be distorted in accounting, as the expected dividend is either paid to the account or it isn’t. Thus, there is no accounting version of dividends anywhere other than in analysts’ forecasts. This simplifies the perception of a reasonable valuation level.
Naturally, a growing dividend is a better option than one that stagnates. A company capable of growing its dividend annually is more likely doing something right regarding business growth or development, so it serves as an excellent filter when an investor tries to find promising candidates among thousands of publicly traded companies. However, a growing dividend cannot be unequivocally considered a sign of a high-quality company, just like no other single characteristic or key figure.
A good return on equity combined with a strong balance sheet may be a sign of a business generating strong cash flow. Strong cash flow, in turn, provides good prerequisites for business growth through acquisitions or other investments. Good cash flow also enables generous profit distribution if the market, according to the company’s strategy, does not currently offer clear sources of growth.
As I mentioned, I like defensive and boring companies. The revenue growth and results of these companies are not as dependent on economic cycles, which means bear markets can open up good opportunities for successful investment decisions. Boring companies typically do something that investors do not consider a very high-growth business, which keeps valuation multiples low. For these companies, future growth opportunities are underestimated, and the ingredients for growth can be found deeper than the surface. Most often, however, only in hindsight.
I also believe in the benefits of broad diversification. For me, broad diversification means owning at least 20 different companies. This eases the psychological challenges associated with investing and probably reveals the functionality of one’s own investment processes more readily from behind the veil of randomness. In my opinion, the marginal benefit of following a company is met fairly quickly, and too close monitoring can even negatively affect the outcome. However, diversification does not preclude making additional investments in the most promising targets, but rather allows for the inclusion of many different interesting cases.
I myself do not spend much time determining the fair value of companies. It is more interesting and generally more useful to examine how companies actually make their profits and what kind of products and services they truly offer. I reflect this against past and current valuation multiples, which gives me a rough idea of whether a company is undervalued or not. However, I believe that a more thorough valuation has its own benefits and certainly helps find various good investment targets that do not fall into my net. It’s about what methods help each individual find promising opportunities.
I generally focus on a company’s future opportunities and do not particularly emphasize existing risks when making company selections. I think that the essence of an investment lies precisely in opportunities, so emphasizing risks does not lead to a good outcome for me.
The mentioned characteristics are mostly features observed in hindsight, found in my own operations and portfolio. Naturally, I myself do not follow my own principles 100%, nor should one follow one’s own principles so slavishly. Locking oneself into one’s own processes and principles easily limits potential new investment targets and learning opportunities, which is not very useful for an investor. For this reason, I also do not categorize myself as an investor in any way, e.g., as a dividend investor, growth investor, etc.
Q2 - Report

Figure 1. My portfolio’s 5-year return history.
The portfolio has recovered reasonably well after the turmoil of March and April, as seen on the right side of Figure 1. The tariff panic spread from US companies to Finnish stocks as well, which offered good buying opportunities. However, a weak cash situation hindered progress. I am not yet entirely sure, however, whether long-term hoarding of cash for dips is wise. The 5-year return has been approximately 95%.


Figure 2. Portfolio holdings.
New acquisitions to the portfolio included:
- Nokian Panimo
- Nordea
- Kesko A
- Lassila & Tikanoja
I made additions to:
- Inderes
- Sampo
- Scanfil
My portfolio’s 5 largest holdings are Inderes, Viafin Service, Fortum, Marimekko, and Relais Group. Inderes’ weight in my portfolio has gradually climbed higher as the stock price continues to crawl under the pressure of a gloomy market, and Viafin’s earnings development has also been reflected in the share price. Marimekko’s and Relais’ good performance continues. I bought Fortum from the discount created by electricity price depression to yield a nice 7-9% dividend return. However, Fortum’s result has been better than expected, mainly due to an optimization premium. At a dividend yield of approximately 5%, however, I do not consider this to be at buying prices, so I have not planned any additional investments for now.

















