Akzo Nobel NV (0A00) was downgraded to a Hold Rating at UBS
Confident Investing Starts Here:
Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions
Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter
According to TipRanks, Haire is an analyst with an average return of -2.5% and a 48.18% success rate. Haire covers the Basic Materials sector, focusing on stocks such as Wacker Chemie AG, BASF SE, and Covestro.
Akzo Nobel NV has an analyst consensus of Strong Buy, with a price target consensus of €70.17.
Based on Akzo Nobel NV's latest earnings release for the quarter ending March 31, the company reported a quarterly revenue of €2.61 billion and a net profit of €107 million. In comparison, last year the company earned a revenue of €2.64 billion and had a net profit of €181 million
Based on the recent corporate insider activity of 26 insiders, corporate insider sentiment is negative on the stock. This means that over the past quarter there has been an increase of insiders selling their shares of 0A00 in relation to earlier this year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 charts that illustrate market overvaluation concerns
Valuation concerns are rising as market metrics flash levels not seen since the dot-com era. Yahoo Finance Reporter Josh Schafer joins Market Catalysts anchor Julie Hyman to break down what could trigger a market pullback from here. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Catalysts here. Are we sort of at a top at this point, after we've had this big rally? Are stocks too expensive? So, this is a chart from Barry Bannister, what he's looking at here is, as it says there, the enterprise valuation relative to economic profit, essentially how much am I paying for stocks based on what the companies are actually producing in some ways. And you can see here, it has not been this overvalued, as Bannister estimates it, since 2000, 1999. What is that, of course? The dot-com bubble, right? And so that is kind of the classic comparison I think we're seeing right now, is the question when you think about this AI-led rally, is okay, is it a dot-com bubble style thing? And at least by this metric, you could at least argue from a valuation perspective, it's looking a little similar. Right. I mean, Barry is a noted bear on the market. I mean, there are those who would say markets don't just roll over because of overvaluation. Something has to happen, right? Right. Well, and I think you see that here, too, right? Look at where we call it overvalued in early 2000. That's a three-year period that we sat there, right? And so you could also point out, yes, we've started to creep higher here, but to your point, truly, the question would be what actually makes this matter. And you need some sort of catalyst, whether that would be economic slowing, some impact from the tariffs, et cetera. I also thought this chart from Max Grenkov at UBS was interesting. So you're looking at the discount rate proxy versus the S&P 500 forward price to earnings ratio. This would be kind of a traditional valuation metric, right? And back to Barry's chart, if you looked at the S&P 500 forward P/E, it would kind of look similar, too. We're definitely in elevated levels here, but what this gap is sort of telling us that Max explained in his commentary is essentially investors are paying a lot for AI exceptionalism. And the question is, does that sort of come through? There is a world where this gap is worth paying more for if I'm an investor, right, and stocks being more expensive, but there's also a world, as we keep talking about during earnings season, where that doesn't come to fruition, right? And then you're perhaps overpaying for stocks at that level. Okay. And what's the third one we have? Our final chart, I love this chart from Todd Sohn over at Strategas. So what he's looking at here is the S&P 500 and essentially making the argument that it's less defensive than it used to be. Well, and what I love about this chart, too, is it's the inverse of what we tend to talk about, which is that, oh, the S&P 500 is so heavily weighted to tech. Okay, so if it's so heavily weighted to tech, what is it less weighted to? And it's less weighted to consumer staples, energy, health care, and utilities. You can see that used to be 40% of the index, going back about 30 years ago. Now from a market cap weighting perspective, it's about 22%. And what I think this also tells us in this valuation discussion, normally you would pay a higher valuation for tech stocks or a tech heavy index, right? Well, the S&P 500 is a tech heavy index now. Savita Subramanian in our chart book sort of made that point that maybe it's worth paying up more and having it be quote-unquote more expensive if you're getting a different product or a different index than you were getting before. Right. Well, and you could also make the argument that things defensive isn't what it used to be, right? It doesn't, you know, there would be some who would argue that even tech has defensive characteristics, and things like health care are perhaps less defensive than they used to be in the past. So these things are all kind of scrambled over time, it feels like. They are. There's a lot of debate, always is. Makes a market. That's what makes it fun. That's what makes our jobs fun. Related Videos Three charts Wall Street pros are watching Why diversifying risk management is 'key' right now Tesla's declining Q2 car sales sparks sell-off: Chart of the Day Southwest Q2 miss: Industry faces 'revenue headwind,' CFO says Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Exclusive-UBS steps up contingency planning as it tries to tame Swiss rules, sources say
By Oliver Hirt, Ariane Luthi and Julie Zhu ZURICH/HONG KONG (Reuters) -UBS is briefing senior staff that the need to examine moving its HQ from Switzerland has grown since the government proposed new capital rules, a source with knowledge of the matter said, while another pointed to London as a favourite alternative. The Swiss government proposed reform measures in June that envisage that UBS - as Switzerland's sole remaining global bank with a balance sheet about double the size of the economy - should capitalise its foreign subsidiaries by 100% rather than 60% currently, to cover potential losses abroad. That could mean the bank has to carry an extra $24 billion in capital. A review by UBS looking at contingency planning has concluded that London is one of the best options for an alternative location should the bank try and move, one of the sources said. Britain has similar rules on foreign subsidiaries but a third source said authorities outside Switzerland may show more flexibility. Two sources familiar with the bank's thinking said UBS was also warning internally that it could be vulnerable to a future takeover by a foreign rival if it were weakened by the rules. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions are confidential. UBS, which is due to release second quarter earnings on Wednesday, has intensified lobbying with parliament since June 6 to push back against the proposed capital changes, two lawmakers said. Even insiders at the Zurich-based wealth manager say UBS - whose leadership argues it came to the rescue when it bought Credit Suisse in a government-engineered deal - does not intend to leave Switzerland. All agree that UBS's principal objective is to soften the regulations. Even so, UBS executives think the government's demands mean that if no compromise is reached, it may need to respond radically, one source familiar with the lender's thinking said, pointing to a possible relocation. UBS told Reuters it would engage in the consultation process for the new rules while evaluating appropriate measures "to address the negative effects that extreme regulations would have on its shareholders." Its Swissness was a "differentiating element", it said, adding that UBS - which has been running an advertising campaign themed "A bank like Switzerland" - wanted to be based in Switzerland "leveraging the mutually beneficial relationship." Switzerland's finance ministry declined to comment on what it said were internal UBS decisions. FINMA, the Swiss regulator, declined to comment. UBS earlier this year started warning about the possibility of shifting its headquarters, but the latest deliberations are reported here for the first time and highlight a political tug-of-war between UBS, led by CEO Sergio Ermotti, and the government about what is best for the bank and for Switzerland. Representatives for the UK Treasury, Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority declined to comment. Swiss Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter said in June that the new rules would make it more costly for the bank to grow abroad but that she hoped UBS would stay in Switzerland. DIFFICULT MOVE As for any large bank, relocation would be costly and difficult and industry insiders say Switzerland's global renown as a wealth management centre has been central to UBS' business model. Pressure is, however, growing on the bank. UBS's shares have underperformed rivals, gaining 7% in 2025 against the wider sector's 37% as investors fear the new rules will impede shareholder payouts and growth prospects. One UBS shareholder, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters it would be difficult for the bank to attract investors if the capital rules talks dragged on for three or four years without the bank making progress in softening them. The ball "is in UBS's court" to find a solution, the investor said. Under the proposed capital requirements, UBS's Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio, a key measure of bank capital, of 14.3% could reach 17%. That would put it above rivals like JPMorgan at 15.8%, Morgan Stanley at 15.7%, and Goldman Sachs at 15.3%, the government estimated in June. Outside experts say like-for-like comparisons are difficult. PERSUADING INVESTORS Switzerland's parliament is not due to receive a draft law on the rules until well into 2026. But UBS executives want to reassure investors by early 2026 they can soften the final legislation, two of the sources said. If it cannot placate investors coming into 2026, UBS may try to repatriate more than the $5 billion in capital it already plans to return to its parent bank, which could eventually fund payouts, analysts say. UBS's efforts have already yielded fruit. Last month a parliamentary committee backed a motion to make the government send all the new banking rules to parliament instead of issuing some directly. "We have to find the right balance between capital that minimises risks but also maintains UBS's competitiveness," said Beat Walti, the lawmaker who proposed the amendment. (Additional reporting by Dave Graham, Lananh Nguyen and Stefania Spezzati; Editing by Tommy Reggiori Wilkes and Susan Fenton)
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Millionaires multiply across the US, but most find it's not all mansions and champagne
NEW YORK (AP) — As a child, Heidi Barley watched her family pay for groceries with food stamps. As a college student, she dropped out because she couldn't afford tuition. In her twenties, already scraping by, she was forced to take a pay cut that shrunk her salary to just $34,000 a year. But this summer, the 41-year-old hit a milestone that long felt out of reach: She became a millionaire. A surging number of everyday Americans now boast a seven-figure net worth once the domain of celebrities and CEOs. But as the ranks of millionaires grow fatter, the significance of the status is shifting alongside perceptions of what it takes to be truly rich. 'Millionaire used to sound like Rich Uncle Pennybags in a top hat,' says Michael Ashley Schulman, chief investment officer at Running Point Capital Advisors, a wealth management firm in El Segundo, California. 'It's no longer a backstage pass to palatial estates and caviar bumps. It's the new mass-affluent middleweight class, financially secure but two zeros short of private-jet territory.' Inflation, ballooning home values and a decades-long push into stock markets by average investors have lifted millions into millionairehood. A June report from Swiss bank UBS found about one-tenth of American adults are members of the seven-digit club, with 1,000 freshly minted millionaires added daily last year. Thirty years ago, the IRS counted 1.6 million Americans with a net worth of $1 million or more. UBS — using data from the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and central banks of countries around the globe — put the number at 23.8 million in the U.S. last year, a nearly 15-fold increase. The expanding ranks of millionaires come as the gulf between rich and poor widens. The richest 10% of Americans hold two-thirds of household wealth, according to the Federal Reserve, averaging $8.1 million each. The bottom 50% hold 3% of wealth, with an average of just $60,000 to their names. Federal Reserve data also shows there are differences by race. Asian people outpace white people in the U.S. in median wealth, while Black and Hispanic people trail in their net worth. Barley was working as a journalist when her newspaper ended its pension program and she got a lump-sum payout of about $5,000. A colleague convinced her to invest it in a retirement account, and ever since, she's stashed away whatever she could. The investments dipped at first during the Great Recession but eventually started growing. In time, she came to find catharsis in amassing savings, going home and checking her account balances when she had a tough day at work. Last month, after one such day, she realized the moment had come. 'Did you know that we're millionaires?' she asked her husband. 'Good job, honey,' Barley says he replied, unfazed. It brought no immediate change. Like many millionaires, much of her wealth is in long-term investments and her home, not easy-to-access cash. She still lives in her modest Orlando, Florida, house, socks away half her paycheck, fills the napkin holder with takeout napkins and lines trash cans with grocery bags. Still, Barley says it feels powerful to cross a threshold she never imagined reaching as a child. 'But it's not as glamorous as the ideas in your head,' she says. All wealth is relative. To thousandaires, $1 million is the stuff of dreams. To billionaires, it's a rounding error. Either way, it takes twice as much cash today to match the buying power of 30 years ago. A net worth of $1 million in 1995 is equivalent to about $2.1 million today, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. A seven-figure net worth is, to some, as outdated a yardstick as a six-figure salary. Nonetheless, 'millionaire' is peppered in everything from politics to popular music as shorthand for rich. 'It's a nice round number but it's a point in a longer journey,' says Dan Uden, a 41-year-old from Providence, Rhode Island, who works in information technology and who hit the million-dollar mark last month. 'It definitely gives you some room to breathe.' No other country comes close to the U.S. in the sheer number of millionaires, though relative to population, UBS found Switzerland and Luxembourg had higher rates. Kenneth Carow, a finance professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, says commonalities emerge among today's millionaires. The vast majority own stocks and a home. Most live below their means. They value education and teach financial responsibility to their children. 'The dream of becoming a millionaire,' Carow says, 'has become more obtainable.' Jim Wang, 45, a software engineer-turned finance blogger from Fulton, Maryland, says even if hitting $1 million was essentially 'a non-event' for him and his wife, it still held weight for him as the son of immigrants who saved money by turning the heat off on winter nights. The private jets he envisioned as a kid may not have materialized at the million-dollar threshold, but he still sees it as a marker that brings a certain level of security. 'It's possible, even with a regular job,' he says. 'You just have to be diligent and consistent.' The resilience of financial markets and the ease of investing in broad-based, low-fee index funds has fueled the balances of many millionaires who don't earn massive salaries or inherit family fortunes. Among them is a burgeoning community of younger millionaires born out of the movement known as FIRE, for Financial Independence Retire Early. Jason Breck, 48, of Fishers, Indiana, embraced FIRE and reached the million-dollar mark nine years ago. He promptly quit his job in automotive marketing, where he generally earned around $60,000 a year but managed to stow away around 70% of his pay. Now, Breck and his wife spend several months a year traveling. Despite being retired, they continue to grow their balance by sticking to a tight budget and keeping expenses to $1,500 a month when they're in the U.S and a few hundred dollars more when they travel. Hitting their goal hasn't translated to luxury. There is no lawn crew to cut the grass, no Netflix or Amazon Prime, no Uber Eats. They fly economy. They drive a 2005 Toyota. 'It's not a golden ticket like it was in the past,' Breck says. 'For us, a million dollars buys us freedom and peace of mind. We're not yacht rich, but for us, we're time rich.'
