Goldman Stock Surges Over 57% in a Year: Is There Still Room to Run?
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. GS shares have surged 57.3% over the past year, outperforming the industry 's 40.9% growth. Its peers, JPMorgan JPM and Morgan Stanley MS, shares rose 48.4% and 50.6%, respectively, over the same time frame.
Price Performance
With such strong momentum, investors are now asking: Is there still room for Goldman to run, or has the stock peaked? Let us delve deeper and analyze what's driving the growth and whether there is more scope to grow further.
Prospects of Goldman's IB Business
A robust revival in merger and acquisition (M&A) activity was expected for 2025, bolstered by a potentially business-friendly Trump administration, expectations for regulatory rollbacks and pent-up demand. However, the reality so far has been more complicated.
Now, the timeline for a solid rebound in M&As has shifted to the second half of 2025 due to Trump's tariff plans, which resulted in extreme market volatility. Given mounting inflationary pressure, a slowdown/recession in the U.S. economy is expected. Amid such a backdrop, companies are rethinking their M&A plans despite stabilizing rates and having significant investible capital.
In the first quarter of 2025, Goldman reported an 8% year-over-year decline in IB revenues, underwhelming against JPMorgan's 12% growth and Morgan Stanley's 7.7% increase in IB fees over the same period. On the surface, this may suggest Goldman is losing ground to its peers. However, the company continues to maintain a leading market share in global M&A advisory, underscoring deep institutional relationships and trusted deal execution capabilities. GS has reported an increased IB backlog, indicating a strong pipeline of potential deals that could convert into revenues as soon as macro conditions improve. This positions Goldman to capitalize well once M&A momentum improves, potentially giving it an edge over peers.
GS & Easing Capital Requirement Proposal
This week, the Federal Reserve proposed a 1.4% reduction in capital requirements for Global Systemically Important Banks (GSIBs), which could translate to approximately $13 billion in capital relief for major players like Goldman, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley.
This proposal, if finalized, would increase operational flexibility for GS. With lower capital buffers, Goldman would be able to reallocate resources more efficiently, potentially scaling operations in key areas such as lending, trading and treasury activities. Further, freeing up billions in capital could boost return on equity (ROE) and unlock new growth avenues. The company may opt to deploy excess capital into higher-yielding assets, invest in business expansion, or return it to shareholders via dividends and share buybacks.
Goldman's Focus on Core Business
GS is making efforts to exit non-core consumer banking business and sharpen its focus on areas wherein it holds a competitive edge — IB, trading, and asset and wealth management (AWM).
Last November, per the Wall Street Journal report, Goldman received a proposal from Apple to end their consumer banking partnership. Per a January 2025 Reuters report, the collaboration may end before the contract runs out in 2030. The move is expected to affect two consumer banking products that Apple currently offers — the Apple Card and the Apple Savings account.
In 2024, Goldman finalized a deal to transfer its GM credit card business to Barclays and completed the sale of GreenSky, its home-improvement lending platform. In 2023, the company divested its Personal Financial Management unit.
These moves demonstrate a well-thought-out exit from consumer finance, allowing Goldman to reallocate capital and attention toward higher-margin, more scalable businesses.
This strategic shift is benefiting the AWM division, which now plays a crucial role in the company's long-term growth. AWM is expanding into fee-based revenue streams to help offset the volatility of the IB business. As of March 31, 2025, AWM managed more than $3.2 trillion in assets under supervision and is experiencing strong momentum in alternative investments and customized wealth solutions for ultra-high-net-worth individuals. In the first quarter of 2025, Goldman reported significant net inflows into its wealth management platform, providing solid evidence of the segment's increasing market traction and client confidence.
Goldman's Strong Liquidity Profile
GS maintains a fortress balance sheet, with Tier 1 capital ratios well above regulatory requirements. This financial strength allows it to return capital to shareholders aggressively through buybacks and a healthy dividend yield (1.79%).
As of March 31, 2025, cash and cash equivalents were $167 billion, and near-term borrowings were $71 billion. Given its strong liquidity, the company rewards its shareholders handsomely.
In July 2024, it increased its common stock dividend 9.1% to $3 per share. In the past five years, the company hiked dividends four times, with an annualized growth rate of 23.6%. Currently, its payout ratio sits at 28% of earnings.
Meanwhile, GS' peer JPMorgan raised its dividend five times over the past five years, with a payout ratio of 27%. Morgan Stanley raised its dividend four times over the past five years and has a payout ratio of 43%.
Additionally, Goldman has a share repurchase plan in place. In the first quarter of 2025, the board of directors approved a share repurchase program authorizing additional repurchases of up to $40 billion of common stock. Earlier, in February 2023, it announced a share repurchase program, authorizing repurchases of up to $30 billion of common stock with no expiration date. At the end of the first quarter, GS had $43.6 billion worth of shares available under authorization.
Goldman's Estimates and Valuation Analysis
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for GS' 2025 and 2026 revenues indicates a year-over-year rise of 3.5% and 5.9%, respectively. Likewise, the consensus estimate for 2025 and 2026 earnings indicates an 8.8% and 14.1% rise, respectively.
Sales Estimates
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
Earnings Estimates
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
In terms of valuation, GS stock also looks expensive. The stock is trading at forward price/earnings (P/E) of 14.60X compared with the industry average of 14.55X. Goldman is also trading at a discount compared with its peers, JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley. Currently, JPM and MS have P/E multiples of 15.26X and 15.67X, respectively.
Price-to-Earnings F12M
GS Stock: A Solid Long-Term Play, Near-Term Caution Advised
Goldman has delivered outstanding returns over the past year, driven by strategic initiatives, strong capital returns and a growing wealth management business. Though its IB business performance lagged peers in the first quarter, its leadership in M&A advisory and robust deal pipeline signal potential upside once market conditions stabilize.
The Fed's proposed capital requirement changes, combined with Goldman's exit from lower-margin consumer banking, provide additional flexibility to boost profitability and scale core operations.
However, with the stock trading at a premium compared with the industry and macro uncertainties persisting, the near-term risk/reward may be balanced. As such, Goldman stock warrants a cautious approach for now. However, it remains a strong long-term holding for investors looking for exposure to a diversified, well-capitalized financial giant poised to benefit from a recovery in deal-making and capital markets activity.
At present, Goldman carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.
Zacks' Research Chief Picks Stock Most Likely to "At Least Double"
Our experts have revealed their Top 5 recommendations with money-doubling potential – and Director of Research Sheraz Mian believes one is superior to the others. Of course, all our picks aren't winners but this one could far surpass earlier recommendations like Hims & Hers Health, which shot up +209%.
See Our Top Stock to Double (Plus 4 Runners Up) >>
Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days.
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS): Free Stock Analysis Report
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM): Free Stock Analysis Report
Morgan Stanley (MS): Free Stock Analysis Report
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
44 minutes ago
- National Post
Colby Cosh: How Donald Trump nationalized U.S. Steel
Last week, Nippon Steel Corp. of Japan formally completed a takeover of U.S. Steel (USS), the venerable but diminished American industrial giant created by J.P. Morgan in 1901. The Japanese company originally placed its bid for USS in late 2023, but it ran into immediate trouble with the Biden administration. U.S. Steel, once widely regarded as an overmighty pollution-spewing relic of Gilded Age cartelization, had magically evolved to become a vulnerable 'national champion' of morally superior things-making industries; and the company still has a powerful unionized workforce in U.S. rust-belt states that are electorally pivotal. Pennsylvania-born President Joe Biden wasn't going to let a corporate brand virtually synonymous with the city of Pittsburgh be raffled off without a tussle. Article content Article content Government foreign-investment approvals necessarily have this sort of personal-rule character wherever they happen, which is pretty much everywhere. If you want to sell a bundle of industrial assets in Country X to folks from Country Y, you had better have approval from the top political boss of X, whether that approval be tacit or explicit. Article content Article content Article content Still, Biden did go through the motions of being head of a government of laws rather than men. He had a U.S. Treasury Department panel, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), whack together an indecisive but fact-based report on the potential costs and benefits of the proposed takeover. Only at that point, with mere days remaining in his term of office, did Biden (or whoever was wielding his executive autopen) fully and officially block the Nippon Steel deal. Biden's successor had already been re-elected, and nobody could imagine that Donald Trump would be any less of an unruly economic nationalist — but the thing that is nearest and dearest to Trump's heart is deal-making, and Nippon Steel found a way to get the takeover done. The Japanese company had already promised to preserve U.S. Steel's Pittsburgh national head office and to honour existing collective-bargaining agreements with the unions. Trump extracted further concessions on investments and hiring, along with a means of enforcing them, namely a 'golden share' controlled by the U.S. government. Article content A 'golden share' is a special kind of equity that gives its holder veto power over specified corporate decisions. It is often used in privatizations to give governments some vestige of control over corporate entities originally created by the state (or, in Canada, the Crown) for public purposes. In this unusual case, the U.S. government is magically gaining a golden share in exchange for permitting the sale of one private company to another. The government will be given the right to choose some U.S. Steel board directors, to forbid any name change, and to veto factory closures, offshoring, acquisitions and other moves. Article content As the Cato Institute immediately pointed out, this is a de facto nationalization of U.S. Steel — the sort of thing that would have had Cold War conservatives climbing the walls and hooting about socialism. But at least socialism professes to be social! Yesterday a lefty energy reporter named Robinson Meyer was nosing around in the revised corporate charter for the newly-acquired U.S. Steel, and he discovered a remarkable detail that the Cato folks had missed: the decision powers of the golden share have been legally assigned to Donald Trump in person and by name for the duration of his presidency. Only after Trump has left the White House do those golden-share powers revert to actual U.S. government departments (Treasury and Commerce).
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
How Michael Sabia can make Ottawa move fast and build things
Michael Sabia is being asked to reverse, in a matter of months, an inertia that has taken hold in the nation's capital over decades. Since Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the erstwhile chief executive officer of Hydro-Québec will serve as Clerk of the Privy Council – the country's top bureaucrat – Ottawa has been rife with speculation about how Mr. Sabia will try to light a fire under a federal public service accustomed to moving more slowly and cautiously than is demanded by the current moment. But while much of the chatter following Mr. Sabia's June 11 appointment has been about personnel changes to the bureaucracy's highest ranks – through an expansive shuffle of deputy ministers, the most senior civil servants in each ministry, expected this summer – that only scratches the surface of what's needed to get things rolling. Hanging in the balance is an agenda, put forward by Mr. Carney to assert Canada's economic sovereignty, that's at odds with the government's implementation capacity to date. It includes fast-tracking energy and infrastructure projects, scaling homegrown technologies, diversifying exports, building housing, reorienting immigration, developing self-reliant supply chains and leveraging industrial gains from increased defence spending. Opinion: Michael Sabia faces an uphill climb in reforming Canada's civil service The scale of the challenge – and what sorts of structural, cultural and personnel changes could be required – were conveyed to The Globe and Mail in recent interviews with two dozen people closely familiar with the bureaucracy's workings, including current and former deputy ministers and senior political officials. Although there was recognition that some departments have functioned better than others (and some have stepped up in other times of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic and 2008 global financial meltdown), they highlighted an array of overarching barriers that have taken root since the 1990s, if not earlier. Among them are a depletion of talent despite the bureaucracy's total ranks growing; particular lack of implementation expertise in some economic areas and policy mechanisms Mr. Carney is prioritizing; disconnect between the public and private sectors; a lack of clear lines of accountability; failure to make use of modern technologies; and severe aversion to taking risks. Mr. Sabia's suitability to tackling all of that, if anyone can, is a subject of considerable debate. Over a late-career run that has included heading pension giant Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, serving as deputy finance minister and then leading Hydro-Québec, he's earned a reputation as a creative policy maker and architect of big, ambitious projects. Among them are the Canada Infrastructure Bank, the Canada Growth Fund and a new hydroelectricity relationship between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. He is also, like Mr. Carney, a rare Canadian executive who has moved fluidly between government and the private sector, giving him an unusual combination of institutional knowledge and outside perspective. At the same time, with his federal experience limited mostly to the Finance department, he may have less knowledge of government-wide dynamics than previous clerks who were career bureaucrats. Sharing some of Mr. Carney's suffer-no-fools reputation, it's an open question how he'll fare at bringing others along. And with a recent pattern of staying in jobs long enough to set big plans in motion and then moving on, it's not clear how much emphasis he'll place on long-term systemic reforms. But If ever there were a time for impatience to be a virtue, this might be it. While there are widespread calls around Ottawa for a formal, government-wide program review to comprehensively reallocate resources and modernize rules and processes – the sort of effort last seriously undertaken by Jean Chrétien's government in the '90s – that push could take most of Mr. Carney's mandate to complete. By then, the opportunity to seize on Canada's elbows-up moment with a transformative economic agenda, in response to U.S. President Donald Trump, might have passed. The hope among some reform-minded government veterans is that Mr. Carney and Mr. Sabia land on a two-track approach – in which they set in motion long-term structural overhaul, to leave the government in better shape than they found it, but more immediately send whatever signals and create whatever workarounds are needed to get stuff done now. That may not be a viable pathway to overcoming every obstacle. There may, for instance, be few quick fixes for Ottawa's reliance on outdated technologies and information systems. But three of the biggest potential obstacles to implementing Mr. Carney's agenda are instructive, in terms of how it could work. A common perception in Ottawa is that high-level bureaucratic talent has diminished over the past couple of decades. More specifically, there are widely acknowledged expertise gaps. In a government that has traditionally done most spending through grants and transfer payments, that includes lack of comfort with more complex financial tools that Mr. Carney may be looking to deploy in industrial strategies. And lack of employment mobility, between the public and private sectors, has contributed to a perceived disconnect between career bureaucrats in Ottawa and policies' real-world impacts. There are many fundamental ways to address those shortcoming – new strategies around recruitment and career advancement, changing pay structures, using technology to expedite glacial hiring processes. Most contentiously, but increasingly whispered about, Ottawa could loosen bilingualism requirements to broaden its pool. Canada has 'ambition deficit' and regulations that are scaring away investment, Sabia says In the near term, the most obvious lever is the anticipated deputy-minister shuffle, following a small shuffle that took place this month. It could see Mr. Sabia bringing in some new faces, and perhaps more so trying to elevate younger talent already in the bureaucracy, even if they have not worked their way up as gradually as has been customary. But many people interviewed for this story also suggested Ottawa may have to get more creative about bringing in people from industry – and possibly provincial governments – to work on policy priorities of Mr. Carney's for which they have specific expertise. That could potentially be done under Interchange Canada, an underutilized federal program enabling exchanges between the public and private sectors. It could also see people seconded from outside government, forming hybrid teams with bureaucrats to advance key files. Navigating conflict-of-interest considerations would be a challenge – but not, by most accounts, an insurmountable one. And Mr. Sabia's unusual history straddling the public and private sectors could help convince others to do so. A near-universal lament is that civil servants feel incentivized to keep their heads down and avoid risks – in putting forward new ideas, or taking ownership of moving policies forward. That's partly because of additional rules and guidelines layered on after any sort of spending or ethics controversy. Paring those down, to maintain but simplify accountability, is seen as a long-term play. But it's also because of a common perception that politicians are prepared to throw bureaucrats under the bus – or shove them in front of parliamentary committees – at the first sign of trouble, rather than taking heat themselves. And that's where there may be an opportunity to quickly pursue culture change. Mr. Sabia could help by sending a signal across the bureaucracy that people who take initiative and move quickly will be valued. Much will come down to Mr. Carney. His tone, early on, has suggested that expedience and ambition are the priority. But bureaucrats tend to say that the real message about risk tolerance will come from how tolerant he and his ministers prove when moving fast causes something to go wrong. Another oft-cited reason for slowness and lack of individual initiative is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. While recent growth of the total federal workforce (well above 300,000 people) is likely to be targeted by Mr. Carney for cost savings, ballooning upper ranks – assistant deputy ministers, associate deputy ministers, directors-general, etc. – have particularly bogged down decision-making by creating hierarchical confusion. So too, bureaucrats counter, has an excess of political staff – numbering around 800, by the end of former prime minister Justin Trudeau's tenure, far more than in other Westminster democracies – dipping in and out of files. Not to mention decisions notoriously getting log-jammed in the Prime Minister's Office. That crowdedness is crying out for a review aimed at paring back and simplifying lines of authority. But some of that could be done informally, for now. While a small number of top priorities will inevitably have heavy involvement from the PMO – and the Privy Council Office, the (also enlarged) bureaucratic department that supports it – the rest could be delegated to ministries with minimal central interference. And deputies there could be pushed to identify a small number of their top performers to push things through, bruised egos be damned. As with other possible quick fixes, it could be inelegant. But Mr. Carney has been elected, and Mr. Sabia appointed, with promised focus on results. Those results may include a dramatically restructured federal government. But they may not have time to wait for it, if they want to get everything else done.
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Michael Taube: Mark Carney leans European, but needs to buy American again
Article content It will also 'promote multilateral dialogue and co-operation with like-minded countries in relevant areas of security and defence where considered mutually beneficial.' Some of the matters mentioned in the agreement include support to Ukraine, peacekeeping operations, military mobility, maritime security, sharing information on defence initiatives and cybersecurity. Article content And it doesn't stop there. Businesses will be encouraged to 'grow and diversify markets by fully and effectively implementing' the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. The parties also agreed to work towards a 'digital trade agreement,' 'identify trends and risks of mutual concern that could affect our economic security,' 'reduce barriers and strengthen agriculture and agrifood trade' and focus on shared energy needs. Article content What about the future of Canada-U.S. relations? While there have been issues between our two countries due to U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs and leadership style, it's vitally important for Carney to rebuild ties with the U.S. There have been political, economic and military disagreements between Canada and the U.S. before. We fought one another during the War of 1812. Nevertheless, we always found ways to agree to disagree and move forward like good friends and allies do. Article content Article content Things looked promising at one point. Carney said earlier this month that his government was 'in intensive negotiations with the Americans' to end the tariffs on aluminum and steel that chilled relations between our two countries. Carney and Trump also agreed to work towards an economic and security pact within the next 30 days during last week's G7 summit in Kananaskis, Alta. Article content Alas, Carney's determined tone has noticeably shifted. He's now hemming and hawing about the path forward. 'We'll do what's right for Canada,' he told reporters in Brussels. 'We're working hard to get a deal, but we'll only accept the right deal with the United States. The right deal is possible, but nothing's assured.' Article content Trump then announced on Friday through his Truth Social account that he was 'terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately.' Why? This was due to Canada's decision to introduce a 'Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies.' Trump believed the Carney Liberal government was 'obviously copying the European Union' with this tax, and felt it was a 'direct and blatant attack' on the U.S. Article content Article content No one is suggesting that Carney is obligated to bend to Trump's every whim and desire during these crucial negotiations. At the same time, this is hardly the sort of descriptive language and rhetorical tone he should be using in public before the July 21 deadline. Article content If there have been issues between the two sides, fine. All Carney had to do was take a more neutral position for the bulk of the 30-day process and crescendo accordingly. This would have shown that he recognized the importance of preserving Canada-U.S. relations and was taking things seriously. It would have been hard to argue against such logic. Article content It appears that Carney's infatuation with the EU has further strained our friendship with the U.S. for the foreseeable future. While some will claim that Trump is the main reason, it's a false narrative. He'll be out of office in a number of years, as will Carney. The devastating political and economic effects of a fractured Canada-U.S. relationship will last long past then. Article content Article content Article content
