Nike Inc. (NKE) Stock Analysis – Chasing Innovation

Nike Inc. (NKE) Basic Data, Overview

Nike, Inc. is an American multinational corporation founded in 1964 as Blue Ribbon Sports and renamed Nike in 1971. Headquartered in Beaverton, Oregon, it is known worldwide for its athletic footwear, apparel, accessories, and equipment. The company owns or has owned several brands, including Converse and, previously, Hurley. Nike employed over 2023 people worldwide in 79000, and its operations include design, outsourcing manufacturing, and global distribution. Nike products are currently available in 190 countries at 40000 points of sale.

Nike is one of the world's largest sporting goods companies and has long been a dominant player in the global sports and fashion markets. It has built a particularly strong position in basketball, running and training-related sportswear, and has had a significant cultural and business impact through iconic partnerships, such as the Jordan brand. Based on market capitalization, Nike is a member of the S&P500 and the Dow Jones indices. Its focus on innovation, strong brands and effective marketing continue to make it one of the industry's leaders.

Market capitalization: 85 billion USD
Investor Relations: https://investors.nike.com/Home/default.aspx

---

📒Table of Contents📒

I have created a table of contents to make it easier for you to navigate the longer articles:

• Nike Inc. (NKE) specialties
• How does Nike Inc. (NKE) make money and what market advantages does it have?
• Nike Inc. (NKE) Metrics
• Nike Inc. (NKE) Acquisitions
• Nike Inc. (NKE) management
• Competitors: Nike Inc. (NKE) opponents
• What risks does Nike Inc. (NKE) face?
• Nike Inc. (NKE) valuation
• Major news and the last quarter
• Other interesting facts about Nike Inc. (NKE)

---

〽️Market segment analysis〽️

In this section, I examine the dynamics of the market segment, how it operates, who the main players are, and what tailwinds or headwinds the players in the given market have to deal with. I will not analyze companies in depth, but I will touch on the market share of individual companies.

---

I have quite a lot of personal experience with the clothing market. My father worked in the clothing industry as an engineer, I even disassembled a clothing production line with him, I had countless branded clothes directly from the factory and the difference in quality is relatively small. I had a hard time discovering a durability advantage, the difference between branded and no-name clothes is very often only whether a well-known brand label is placed on it at the end of production or not.

That's why I don't really like the clothing industry, because I think it's a low-value-added business where companies don't really have a technological advantage over their competitors. The problem is that all clothes are made by the same companies and on the same production lines, with the same technology, typically in the Far East. The three largest clothing producing countries are China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. However, consumers have to be convinced somehow why a piece of clothing is different from the others, otherwise you wouldn't be able to charge a premium for certain brands. Shoe manufacturing is somewhat of an exception to the above, as this is where most innovation is possible.

🚨The entry threshold into the market is low, it doesn't require a large investment, there is no special technology or network effect, the only truly strong competitive advantage can be gained through brand loyalty and brand value. 

This is not really exact, it is difficult to measure, but it should obviously be reflected in the company metrics. The market leader is clearly Nike Inc. (NKE), but the following players are also significant (based on 2024 revenue data):

1. Nike Inc.: $47.82 billion (US)
2. Adidas AG: $24.3 billion (Germany)
3. Lululemon Athletica Inc.: $10.6 billion (US)
4. Puma SE: ~10 billion USD (Germany)
5. Anta Sports Products Limited: ~9.8 billion USD (China)
6. Under Armour Inc.: $5.3 billion (US)
7. ASICS Corporation: ~$4.7 billion (US)
8. Li-Ning Sports Goods Co.,: ~4 billion USD (China)
9. Columbia Sportswear Company: ~$3.4 billion (US)
10. FILA Holdings Corp. (Misto Holdings Corp.): ~3 billion USD (South Korea)

Interestingly, Lululemon, the yoga pants company, is already in 3rd place, while Anta and Li-Ning are Chinese companies and are rapidly rising in terms of revenue. Despite this, the list is still dominated by American and European companies. The competition is extremely intense, there are many players, the margins are low, and there is a fixed, sunk cost in the production of the product.

Economies of scale are very important, a bit like the retail business, where volume is everything. In light of this, I don't think there is a particularly deep economic advantage for companies in the segment. You can practically exchange one piece of clothing for another at any time, meaning there are no switching costs.

Nothing proves this better than the fact that everyone has all kinds of brands of clothing, not just Nike. However, there are companies that produce specialized products, such as running shoes, that have some technological advantage and produce for a narrower, more knowledgeable community, typically found in the shoe industry. For example:

• HOKA One One: $1.8 billion (owned by Deckers Outdoor Corp)
• Mizuno: 1.6 billion USD
• Brooks Sports Inc.: ~$1 billion (owned by Berkshire Hathaway)

A narrow moat, as an economic advantage, can develop due to brand loyalty and the prestige of wearing it. However, this is not a permanent thing, but a periodically changing phenomenon, we call it fashion. That is why I avoid the clothing industry as much as possible, with two exceptions:

• ⚠️in the case of unrealistically low company value, if the company has good quality
• ⚠️if the brand is a market leader, such as Nike Inc. (NKE)

There are also two characteristics of the clothing industry that clearly show which brands are luxury and which are not. Luxury brands do not have much of an online sales branch, but customers go in and look at the product that costs 10000 USD, such as products from Hermes, Kering or Louis Vuitton. These companies do not have discounts because they do not want to erode the brand value with promotions. In many cases, their products are made to order, the number of products produced is low, but the pricing is high. It is important that these do not compete with sportswear manufacturers, but it is worth knowing their characteristics.

In contrast, brands in the everyday category, such as Vans, North Face and the like, which are under the umbrella of VF Corp (VFC), carry larger inventories and are very concerned with turnover, which shows how quickly they can sell and re-manufacture goods. If demand is high, turnover increases; if it is low, products are put into storage, and then markdowns are applied. Low turnover is bad in two ways: the price drop results in lost revenue, and the cost of storage also increases. It is also worth noting that markdowns destroy brand equity, because why would consumers buy clothes at full price if they can get them cheaper later?

☝️The clothing industry is cyclical, so consumption decreases significantly in a recession, as buying clothes is typically a deferred expense. 

The market size is 220 billion USD, while its growth between 2025-2032 is expected to be 4.41% CAGR, which is not a record-breaking value, i.e. it does not even come close to the numbers of the technology market, for example.

👟All about Nike👟

COVID has changed consumers' shopping and dressing habits quite a bit, as people don't dress up much when they're at home. That's why they prefer more casual clothing, but it's also true that it almost doesn't matter what they wear at home, which is also called the home office effect. It's certain that clothing has shifted towards a more casual, sporty direction, which could even be a kind of supporting trend for the sportswear market. The problem, however, is that you can still buy branded products in the thrift store, I have a lot of Nike stuff from there, and there are regular discounts, so it's definitely not a company selling premium or luxury products.

🇧🇷Generation Y and Z are also much more environmentally conscious, and since clothing manufacturing is one of the biggest polluters, due to high water consumption, it has become trendy to buy used clothes, which include Nike Inc. (NKE) products.🇧🇷

However, there are supporting trends:

• 📈population growth
• 📈rapid wear and tear of clothing
• 📈the proportion of more casual clothing is increasing at the expense of others
• 📈The expansion of the global middle class and the vanity megatrend
• 📈the advancement of a sporty, healthy lifestyle, which supports the sale of sportswear quite a bit (and Nike is very strong in this, as they support a lot of athletes or teams)
• 📈📉or the change in fashion trends.

So, if I want to, I can see things positively, if I want to, I can see things negatively, there are a lot of things on both sides that you can believe in. The above is true for almost all clothing companies, but Nike Inc. (NKE) seems to be the strongest brand of them all. Finally, an interesting fact: Piper Sandler publishes a survey every quarter called TSTW (available here), which provides statistics on the shopping and consumption habits of young Americans. In the footwear and sportswear segment, Nike has been in the lead for many quarters, sometimes supplemented by Converse:

---

🙋‍♂️Nike Inc. (NKE) specialties 🙋‍♂️

In this section, I examine what specialties the analyzed company has, what its position is in the market, and whether it does anything differently than its competitors. If so, what and how, and what impact does this have on their operations.

---

I have spoken generally about the market above, now it is worth saying a few words about Nike Inc. (NKE) as a company. It was named after the Greek goddess Nike, founded in 1971 by the Knight family, before that it existed under the name Blue Ribbon between 1964-1971, led by Phil Knight. A movie was also made about Nike, starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, titled Water, while the company logo symbolizes Nike's wings, this is the Nike checkmark.

Nike Inc. (NKE) is the largest among other sportswear companies. The global athletic footwear market is estimated at $407 billion. Nike owns 16% of this market and operates 190 stores in 6000 countries, of which 1000 are company-owned and 5000 are franchised. The U.S. sportswear market is estimated to be worth $165 billion (2024 data), with Nike Inc. (NKE) owning 15%, Adidas AG. (ADS) 5%, and Lululemon Athletica (Lulu) around 4%. Consumers can also see the Nike logo on players in the three most popular American sports: the NBA, NFL, and MLB.

The most surprising thing is that the situation is similar in the Western European market, estimated at 71 billion USD, with Nike holding 17% and Adidas 5%. The figures for the Chinese market in 2024 were as follows: Nike Inc. (NKE) gained a 56% share of the 21 billion USD market, in addition to the fact that the size of the Chinese market tripled between 2013 and 2024. It is worth noting that the market shares of the aforementioned Anta and Li-Ning in China are 23% and 9%, respectively.

Nike Inc. (NKE) owns numerous brands under its own name, related to the parent company:

• Nike Golf
• Nike Pro
• Nike+ etc.

There are sub-brands with prominent names:

• Air Jordan (basketball shoes and basketball apparel)
• Air Force 1
• Air max
• Nike CR7 (Cristiano Ronaldo brand)
• Converse (acquired through acquisition)

There are also all kinds of logos and slogans associated with the brand, such as “Just Do It” or “Swoosh”, and the company previously owned brands such as Umbro. As you can see, Nike Inc. (NKE) is not a single brand, but rather a family of brands, representing extremely high brand power.

Only brand power provides a real, economic competitive advantage, and companies also have a kind of know-how, because a lot of brands and technologies are tied to shoes that other manufacturers cannot offer, such as Nike Air. Nike Inc. (NKE) has realized that it needs to keep its brand names in the public eye, which is why it spends a lot on advertising and supporting popular athletes and football teams that the public follows closely. Some examples:

• the basketball-related Air Jordans, or the Nike Swoosh in the NBA
• Eliud Kipchoge and Nike Pegasus shoes
• Cristiano Ronaldo, Kevin Durant and LeBron James are also Nike-sponsored athletes
• Football teams: FC Barcelona, ​​Chelsea, PSG, Inter Milan, Atletico Madrid, Tottenham

As for Nike Inc. (NKE)'s technical developments and technological innovations:

• In the 1980s, they invented the air cell shoe sole, which was used in the Nike Air series of footwear.
• currently, their running shoes feature technologies such as Epic React, VaporMax, and ZoomX
• In 2024, they spent 500 million USD on developments, while Adidas invested 170 million EUR and Puma 90 million EUR on the same.

Nike Inc. (NKE)'s most expensive shoe is the result of a collaboration with Louis Vuitton, priced at $3000 per pair, but several shoes are sold for over $1000 on the secondary market.

---

💰How does Nike Inc. (NKE) make money and what market advantages does it have?💰

In this section, we examine what exactly the company does to generate revenue, what products and services it has, how indispensable they are. Does it have any competitive advantage (economic moat), how defensible is it, is the trend decreasing or increasing, and what is likely to happen in the long term.

---

It may come as a surprise, but Nike Inc. (NKE) makes most of its money from its expensive shoes, selling about 800 million pairs of them annually. Why is it that footwear can be priced much higher than almost any other sportswear item? Because shoes are almost the only item of clothing that consumers are reluctant to replace. Everyone's feet are a little different, you have to find the right size, and there are many technological advances that can be smuggled into the structure of the shoe. Just look at an exploded view of a serious sports shoe, it is made up of surprisingly complex layers.

In the list below, you can see that a significant portion of Nike Inc. (NKE)'s revenue comes from footwear:

• shoes (Nike Air Jordan basketball and Nike Pegasus running shoes): 64% ($30.5 billion)
• other clothing: 27.8% ($13.3 billion)
• accessories (bags, socks, soccer balls, etc.): 4.6% ($2.2 billion)
• Converse share: 3.7% ($1.8 billion)

Another important element in the case of shoes is that consumers are much more inclined to try them on in person than to order them online, unlike other clothing accessories. That is why consumers are willing to visit Nike Inc. (NKE) stores, so it is no coincidence that physical stores still generate 44% of revenue to this day. Of course, Nike Inc. (NKE) does not rely only on the revenues of the Nike brand, but in essence, only Converse can contribute to Nike's success in a decisive, meaningful way:

• Nike generates roughly 96% of revenue
• and Converse and other brands roughly 4%

It is important to know that clothing industry players basically sell their products through three channels:

• Through an intermediary partner: Other stores list and sell Nike Inc. (NKE) products, such as InterSport or SportsDirect in Europe and Footlocker in the US. The rates are roughly as follows: a shoe is sold for $100 to resellers, who then sell it for about $160.
• Physical store: 44%: They sell directly to the consumer who walks into one of Nike's stores. Nike keeps all of the $160 of the shoe's price.
• Online sales: 26%: They serve customers online, from a web store. There are roughly 100 million active Nike app users worldwide, but the number of registrations has reached 500 million.

The territorial distribution is shown in the images below, but the following can be said about it:

• USA and EU: mature market, Nike Inc. (NKE) is the strongest in the USA, but also the market leader in the EU, where consumers also like to buy Puma and Adidas. In the USA, its competitor is Under Armour, and in running shoes, Brooks, Hoka, On Running and other niche running shoe manufacturers.
• Although the graph often lumps Europe with the Middle East and Africa, the former is clearly the more significant.
• Its fastest growing market is China, which is interesting because it has to contend with countless competitors such as Anta, Peak, Li-Ning, or 361 Degrees.

The revenue breakdown by territory and clothing category is as follows (based on 2024 data):

In the sportswear industry, a decent margin can be achieved on shoes, as they can incorporate more serious technological achievements here, in the case of a T-shirt only the use of materials and quality control can be different. Sportswear manufacturers cannot create as much value here, and Nike Inc. (NKE) has also recognized this. It is no coincidence that shoes generate two-thirds of the company's revenue.

🏰Economic moat🏰

In this segment, I examined whether the company has an economic competitive advantage, which Warren Buffett referred to as an “economic moat,” which keeps competitors from besieging the company’s fortress, or business, and taking over its market. In the case of Nike Inc. (NKE), the following are true:

• 🫸Cost/scale advantage: is questionable. Nike Inc. (NKE) is the world's largest sportswear manufacturer, selling 800 million pairs of shoes a year and the number of sportswear units sold is probably even higher. This certainly gives it a significant advantage of scale over smaller competitors. However, it should be added that the largest manufacturer of sports shoes is Shenzhou International, which also supplies Adidas and Puma, so the production costs are probably very close to each other for each company.
• 🫸Switching cost: There is nothing stopping consumers from wearing products from another brand, in fact, almost everyone wears mixed clothing. You can check this relatively easily: just open your own wardrobe.
• 🫸Network effect: Perhaps the more people wear a Nike product, the more familiar the brand becomes. People like to belong, which further strengthens the brand power of Nike Inc. (NKE). According to a 2022 survey, 92% of Americans have heard of the Nike brand, and according to August 2023, at least 140 million people have visited the company's website. However, the same effect probably applies to all competitors.
• 🫸Intangible assets, know-how, trademark: Yes, Nike is a very powerful brand. The very feeling of wearing a product made by Nike Inc. (NKE) is a matter of vanity. And the company has all sorts of achievements and trademarks in the field of running shoes. In 2023, Nike took the No. 1 spot in brand power among apparel accessories, beating LVMH, which also owns Louis Vuitton.
• 🫸Barriers to entry: in a sense, it is very low, anyone can print a t-shirt, for example. Creating a technologically advanced shoe, however, is not an easy task at all, but it is not impossible either. That is why there are so many relatively large manufacturers on the market, but the fact that none of them has a monopoly also means that they cannot really gain a technological advantage over each other in the long term. In fact, in this market, brand power is one of the most important factors that determines the choice.

Based on the above, the deep moat rating that Morningstar gives to Nike Inc. (NKE) is highly questionable, I don't really see why market trends dominated by fashion waves wouldn't reverse if there were no switching costs. However, I wouldn't underestimate brand power and economies of scale, so I think Nike Inc. (NKE) has a Narrow Moat* rating.

*Such ratings are also quantitatively supported by Morningstar. For a company to earn a deep moat rating, its return on invested capital (ROIC) must exceed the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) for 20 years, as if the former exceeds the latter, the company creates shareholder value.

---

🎢Nike Inc. (NKE) metrics🎢

In this section, I examined what metrics characterize the company, how it performs on the revenue side, what margins it operates with, whether it has debt, what the balance sheet shows. I look for items that are challenging - too high debt, high goodwill, etc. - what return on capital the company is working with, what its cost of capital is, how the revenue and cost side are structured. I also examine trends, owner value creation, and what the company uses the cash it generates.

---

📈How is the S&P500 performing?📉

Below you can read the metrics for the S&P500. Since many people use the US stock market index as a benchmark and also buy S&P500 ETFs, it is worth looking at what companies are doing in aggregate (obviously, you should be happy if the company you are analyzing is outperforming these values).

S&P500 2024 data:

• SP&500 revenue growth: +7%
• SP&500 profit growth: +10%
• SP&500 gross margin: 45%
• SP&500 net margin: 13%
• SP&500 ROE: 15%
• S&P 500 ROIC: 12%
• S&P 500 ROCE: 11%

I've previously included two images of Nike Inc. (NKE)'s revenue, but that doesn't tell you how much the company makes. I've also included metrics for three competitors, Lululemon, Adidas, and Puma, on the image showing margins. To make the values ​​more transparent, I've broken them down into three graphs, showing gross, operating, and net margins.

As you can see, Lululemon is outperforming its competitors, but they mostly serve a narrow segment, for example, you can find a total of 3 pairs of men's shoes on their site. But Adidas and Puma are considered direct competitors, compared to which Nike Inc. (NKE) operates with mostly similar gross margins.

The operating margin is also the same as I mentioned earlier, except that the previously higher Nike Inc. (NKE) metrics have slipped quite a bit compared to its German competitors. Operating margin simply tells you how much money the company has left after deducting operating expenses, but before deducting taxes, depreciation and a few other items. Of course, this does not mean that Nike is operating with higher costs; a drop in revenue can also cause the values ​​to fall.

There's not much difference here, but Puma is shockingly underperforming in this area. In fact, in addition to net profit margin, it's also worth looking at FCF margin, as it approximates things from a cash flow perspective, meaning it doesn't include depreciation and similar non-cash accounting bets.

Based on the above, of the three Nike, Puma, and Adidas in the same group, the former is the strongest, while Lululemon, which mainly sells yoga pants, outperforms all of them. This in itself would not be a particularly big problem, but I will show you another company, the Chinese Anta Sports (2020), which is one of the biggest competitors of Nike Inc. (NKE) in the Chinese market and is roughly the same size as Puma and Lululemon. In the picture, you can see the numbers broken down by years and not quarters, as I was curious to see whether Anta Sports (2020) rose compared to Nike Inc. (NKE) or whether Nike declined. As you can see, it is the former, Anta Sports (2020) simply overtook Nike, but it is worth knowing that Anta is almost only present in the Chinese market, where it also has the advantage of home field.

I would like to highlight a sentence from Morningstar's analysis:

• "The Chinese sportswear market is increasingly competitive, as nationalism has boosted native brands and as international brands like Lululemon expand. Nike's ability to gain share in this market is crucial to its long-term growth and profitability."

So it's not just me who thinks so, but Morningstar does too, and if you look back at Nike Inc.'s (NKE) revenue distribution, you can see that it's been essentially stagnant in the Chinese market for 5 years. In 2020 it was $6678 million, and in 2025 it's $6978 million, so the company is being squeezed by Chinese rivals.

Although I won't be covering the Chinese company Anta Sports (2020) for now, it's clear that there are companies in the sportswear industry that have better metrics on paper than Nike Inc. (NKE). Let's see what Nike Inc. (NKE)'s debt shows. Fortunately, it's not much:

• cash: $10.4 billion
• debt: $11.92 billion
• net debt: $1.52 billion
• annual profit: 4.5 billion USD

As you can see, Nike Inc. (NKE) has minimal net debt, which it could pay off roughly three times from its annual profit. However, the annual figures show that the company previously had net cash. It is not worth drawing any particular conclusions from this, I think that indebtedness does not endanger the company.

🧮What do ROIC and ROCE metrics show?🧮

ROIC – Return on Invested Capital – shows how efficiently the company uses its total invested capital to generate profit. Read more here.

• It shows the company's fundamental value creation capability.
• It filters out the impact of the financing structure.
• If ROIC exceeds the cost of capital (WACC), the company is creating value.

ROCE – Return on Capital Employed – shows how efficiently the company uses its long-term financing sources. Read more here.

• It measures the profitability of business activities.
• It does not take into account tax effects.
• A good basis for comparison between different industry players.

Indicator	What does it measure?	Who is it useful for?	When is it considered good?
ROCE	Total return on capital	Long-term investors	If higher than the industry average
ROIC	Return on invested capital	Equity investors	If higher than WACC
ROE	Return on equity	Shareholders	If stable and sustainably high

Let's look at the usual internal rate of return metrics, such as ROCE, ROIC, and ROE. ROIC should be contrasted with WACC, or weighted average cost of capital, which fluctuates between 8-9%. If the return on invested capital is higher than this, the company creates value.

I switched back to quarterly breakdown again, and as you can see, the curves follow each other. A downward trend is visible, which indicates mismanagement of the company, I will come back to this later. You may rightly ask what the problem is with this, if Nike Inc. (NKE) still easily beats the S&P500 in this area. Overall, nothing if the numbers were stable, but they are not. Below you can see similar values ​​of the competitors summarized in a table. Here too, it is true that Nike Inc. (NKE) easily outperforms Adidas and Puma, but does not outperform Anta and Lululemon.

It is important to note that I am not saying that Nike Inc. (NKE) is a worse company than Anta or Lululemon, as the numbers above do not tell us anything about quality characteristics, but the numbers do not lie either. I would have reservations about the data provided for Chinese companies, but Lululemon Athletica (LULU) seems to be a high-quality company in the sportswear sector in many ways.

Nike Inc. (NKE) Ownership Value Creation

On the owner value side, I usually look at how the company uses the free cash generated. Here are some things a company can do with cash:

1. reinvests in the business (2024 million USD spent on development in 500)
2. reduced debt (relatively little in the case of Nike Inc. (NKE))
3. pays dividends (2.8%)
4. buys back shares (spent $8 billion on it in 2 years)
5. acquires other companies (this is not the case with Nike Inc. (NKE))

We've already talked about debt, and Nike Inc. (NKE) isn't exactly a big acquirer. When it comes to reinvesting money back into the business, it's not a capital-intensive company, with product sales and administrative expenses, which include marketing costs, fluctuating between 30-35% for years. That means they can spend the rest on dividends, share buybacks, or just sit on cash. As they say: a picture speaks louder than words!

Above you can see shareholder return, which is a combination of share buybacks, dividend payments, and debt reduction. How should you interpret the above image? The negative gray bar is the amount spent on share buybacks, while the orange is management's stock-based compensation, which pales in comparison to the buybacks. I included this in the image because for many companies, such as Adobe, Veeva Systems or Intuit, this value is outrageously high, which is not in favor of the owners. Nike Inc. (NKE) uses stock-based compensation at a rate of roughly 1.5% of revenue, which I find completely acceptable.

Next to it you can see the dividend payout ratio. Quantified:

• 2024: $4.2 billion, while Nike Inc. (NKE) has repurchased shares worth roughly $8 billion over two years
• Nike Inc. (NKE) also pays a 2.8% dividend, with a payout ratio of 51%.

Regarding share buybacks, it is worth noting that the number of shares has decreased by 9.5% over the past decade. Between 2022 and 2026, along with falling share prices, they are opportunistically buying back their shares at lower valuations, totaling $18 billion.

While I'm not a big fan of paying dividends, especially not for a company as mismanaged as Nike Inc. (NKE), given the company's current cash situation, I find it acceptable. It's a nightmare from a tax perspective, and I'd much rather see this amount in the stock buyback window, now that the company is undervalued or the developments would be worth ramping up.

---

💵Nike Inc. (NKE) Acquisitions💵

In this section, I examine how acquisitive the nature of the company is and what impact each acquisition had on the life of the company, if any.

---

Nike Inc. (NKE) is not known for large acquisitions, but rather for organic growth. You can find smaller acquisitions in the past, some of which complement the core business:

• CONVERSE, 2003 – 305 million USD, in 2024 their revenue from the brand was already 2.1 billion USD
• Zodiac, March 2018 – analytics company. Acquisition value: 3 million USD
• Celect, August 2019 – predictive analytics company, AI company, purchase price not disclosed
• RTFKT Studio – a virtual, NFT token company, where the content of the NFTs is typically a shoe, which can be introduced into the Metaverse, for example. Acquisition value: 1 billion USD
• Datalogue, February 2021 – digital sales and machine learning technologies, purchase price not disclosed

What would be really interesting is the acquisition of competitors, but that hasn't happened for a long time. In fact, the opposite is more typical, the company has increasingly focused on its core business and divested itself of its previous assets:

• sold Bauer Hockey – 2008
• sold Umbro – 2012, which was a huge flop
• sold Coole Haan – 2012, for 570 million USD, which was purchased in 1988 for 95 million USD

As you can see, since 2013, they have only kept the Converse brand as a brand under Nike Inc. (NKE). Overall, I think this is a positive trend, a good example of the opposite is VF Corp., which bought up a bunch of brands, such as Supreme, and then neatly separated them and sold them at a reduced price.

However, I have a thought that is related to this, and that is that Nike is basically growing organically and not only because it is supported by the megatrends of vanity, sportiness, and healthy lifestyle that support the market, but also because sales are shifting more from physical stores towards direct sales. What does this mean? It means that it is less and less possible to buy Nike products from partners, such as Foot Locker, which is a kind of premiumization, and on the other hand, the mix within the direct sales channel is also shifting towards the online space.

Online sales are much cheaper than maintaining physical stores, so you can earn more on a given shoe/accessory in the long run. So there are a lot of areas that can be easily optimized that don't require acquisitions or special investments, but extra items may appear on the marketing cost side. This makes the business less and less capital-intensive in the long run, and fixed costs have to shift towards variable costs. In addition, resellers are dependent on Nike and not vice versa. The transition to a direct sales channel has also been advocated by the management of Nike Inc. (NKE) in the past few years, but this has not been very successful. Although online sales have expanded, the company has neglected its retail partners who physically serve customers, So their turnover fell, and the result of the two sent sales into a negative spiral, you can read more about this in the management section.

---

🤵Nike Inc. (NKE) Management🤵

In this section, I examine who runs the company and how. What is the bonus system, how much risk – skin in the game – do the managers take on while running the company? Is there a family connection, or perhaps a special “heritage” factor?

---

The founding of Nike Inc. (NKE) is linked to the Knight family, as mentioned in the introduction. Therefore, family members definitely play an important role in management. Nike Inc. (NKE) shares are listed in a dual structure. The A-shares are voting shares that are not traded on the stock exchange. The majority of these are owned by founder Phil Knight and his son, Travis Knight. Furthermore, the owners of the A-shares vote for 9 out of 12 board members. In other words, the Knight family has total control over Nike Inc. (NKE), regardless of the percentage of shares actually owned.

Listed B shares are traded on the public market, but do not carry voting rights. However, the largest shareholders may delegate 3 members to the board of directors.

• Phil Knight – founding member, owning a total of 23 million Class A and 32 million Class B shares, representing approximately 10.6% of the company in 2024. He was the company's chairman from 1968 to 1990 and 2000 to 2004, but resigned from his position after the death of his son Matthew, and has since served as honorary chairman of the board as a non-voting member.
• Travis Knight – Phil Knight's son, owner of 41 million shares, 2.8% owner, but also CEO of the Swoosh company, so indirectly his share position is much larger than what is actually in his name.
• John Donahole II – former CEO, owns 1.7 million Class B shares, succeeded Elliot Hill in 2020, previously served as CEO of eBay and ServiceNow. Remains on Paypal's board of directors.
• Elliott Hill – CEO since October 2024, taking over from John Donahole II. He has extensive experience in Nike affairs, having been CEO from 1988 to 2020.
• Daniel Heaf – CSTO, responsible for strategy and corporate transformation, was replaced, position eliminated
• KeJuan Wilkins – He was a CCO, worked at Nike for 20 years, was removed from his position
• Monique Matheson – CHRO, responsible for human resources, retired
• Clare Hamill – Vice President, responsible for innovation, retired
• Scott Uzzell – He was the head of the North American region, he was replaced
• Tom Peddie – Replaced North American regional head Scott Uzzell, who has been with Nike for 30 years

☝️It is worth mentioning Swoosh Ltd., which was founded by Phil Knight and owns 231 million Class A and 263 million Class B shares of Nike Inc. This is roughly 77.5% of the company's Class A and 17.8% of its Class B shares. Swoosh also votes on behalf of Phil Knight, and the company is run by his son, Travis Knight.

The above shows that quite a few top executives have been let go or have retired, which is often just a fancy term for the same thing. The background to this was the significant mismanagement of Nike Inc. (NKE), the decline in sales and the resulting sharp drop in the share price. The highest price was around 177.51 USD, and currently the price is 62.46 USD per share, which corresponds to a drop of about 65%. The reasons for the mismanagement are mainly the following:

• The previous management, led by John Donahoe, focused heavily on online sales. It was said that they wanted to increase the proportion of online sales to 60% by the end of this year. This has not been achieved, to put it mildly, currently 26%. There is logic behind this, because this way Nike Inc. (NKE) will have much more money than if it were to sell its products through its partners.
• the above alienated wholesale partners, cooperation deteriorated
• making strategic mistakes, for example, the previous CEO eliminated product categories based on sports
• The quality of the products deteriorated, consumers complained about the durability of the shoes, and the company received a lot of negative criticism.
• Innovations were lacking, Nike Inc. (NKE) became comfortable with its situation, while competitors such as Lululemon advanced in niche markets, but I could also mention brands that specifically produce running shoes, such as Hoka, Brooks, On Running

Personal opinion, but Nike's website is also a mess, for example, how can a 2017 investor briefing exist on their site in 2025? Ridiculous for a company this big:

Some examples of the above:

• Concerns have also been raised about the quality of Nike Inc. (NKE) shoes. For example, the polyurethane sole material of Air Jordan models degrades over time, which can lead to the shoes becoming unusable. This is especially a problem for collectors, as older models are often unwearable due to the degradation of the sole material. A huge number of people collect shoes, especially those that are discontinued and no longer available.
• I could also mention the criticisms made by Major League Baseball players and their union regarding the new Vapor Premier uniforms designed by Nike. They were transparent, easily torn, and did not meet previous quality expectations, meaning Nike Inc. (NKE) wanted to innovate in areas where it did not need to.

Fortunately, management has recognized this and has refocused on innovation, which they have dubbed the WinNow strategy. Another such initiative is the Breaking4 project, which aims to break the 4-minute mile mark with the help of Kenyan runner Faith Kipyegon. This project focuses not only on athletic performance but also on technological developments, hoping to regain the brand’s reputation for innovation.

📚Book recommendation📚

For anyone interested in the life of the Knight family, I recommend the book Phil Knight – The Nike Story. Original title: Phil Knight – Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike.

---

🆚Competitors: Nike Inc. (NKE) rivals🆚

In this section, I examine who the competitors of the analyzed company are, what is their market position, whether they are in a subordinate, secondary or superior role. What is their market share and what is their specialty? Are they losing or gaining market share to their competitors?

---

Although I used a lot of competitor metrics to present the company's numbers, I would like to share a few additional thoughts. First, I think there is a kind of polarization among sporting goods manufacturers. More and more sports goods and shoes that meet special needs are available on the market, in return for which they can be sold at higher prices and with greater profitability. In addition, there are a fair number of competitors that include traditional sporting goods manufacturers and fashion brands. Some examples:

• mainly running shoe manufacturers: HOKA, Brooks, On Running, Saucony, Asics, Mizuno
• yoga pants company: Lululemon
• sportswear manufacturers from the USA: Under Armour, New Balance
• sportswear manufacturers from Germany: Adidas, Puma
• sportswear manufacturers from South Korea: FILA
• sportswear manufacturers from China: Li-Ning, Anta, Peak, 361 Degree

I intentionally left out companies like VF Corp, which are more commercial or support a subculture like Vans, because they are not direct competitors to Nike Inc. (NKE). Nor did I include Decathlon Group, which serves a completely different segment of the market. Morningstar lists roughly similar competitors:

Overall, I think the biggest problem is the lack of innovation in Nike Inc. (NKE)'s offerings. The company hasn't done its homework, and its competitors have. This is evident in the collapse of their metrics, consumers have turned away from Nike, and it's not the competitors who are doing anything new.

---

⚡What are the risks of Nike Inc. (NKE)?⚡

In this section, I examine all the risks that could affect the company's long-term future. Currency, regulatory, market disruption, and so on.

---

In the case of Nike Inc. (NKE), the biggest risk in the past few quarters has been poor internal operations, which the company is currently trying to reverse. However, there are external influences that the company has no influence on. Clothing is a kind of fashion item, not an essential product, people eat, pay for housing costs, buy their medicines before buying clothes, since they are a deferred expense. Because of this, the industry is cyclical, if the economy is in recession, then the revenue of sporting goods manufacturers also falls.

👕Fashion changes👕

I don't need to explain that fashion is a very fickle thing. Nobody wears flared jeans or 60s hats anymore. I don't think this is such a big problem for Nike Inc. (NKE) because there are so many supportive trends. An active, healthy lifestyle is increasingly becoming more prominent, and the impact of working from home is leading to more casual attire. I don't think Nike Inc. (NKE) products would not be chosen by consumers due to changes in fashion.

♻️Cyclical industry♻️

It is a clear industry-wide problem that sportswear is not an essential product, meaning that its consumption can be postponed. During recessions, people first save on non-essential items, such as premium sports shoes. Revenues are often strongly tied to sporting events, such as the Olympics, World Cups or the start of school, but for us, longer-term trends are more important. It is a big question where we are in the economic cycle right now, as growth in Europe, for example, has fallen significantly and the economy is suffering. But this is a problem that affects all competitors, not specific to Nike Inc. (NKE).

😡Scandals😡

It mainly concerns luxury brands, such as the Balenciaga scandal, but consumers also expect a kind of social responsibility from sportswear manufacturers. For example, a politically incorrect, ambiguous campaign can cause a great loss of prestige for the brand, but the private affairs of a popular athlete can also have a say in advertising contracts, see the Tiger Woods case.

🫰Price competition and distribution problems🫰

I think Nike Inc. (NKE) has better pricing power than its competitors, and in return, consumers expect more from their products. If there is no added value from Nike, or customers do not feel this, for example because the company has postponed developments, then this may damage their reputation. The collapse of distribution chains a few years ago affected Nike less than, say, companies that use chips, but since the company has the vast majority of its products manufactured in the Far East, supply chain problems could affect Nike.

🛃US Customs🛃

Linking back to the previous issue, if America does indeed raise tariffs, then Nike Inc. (NKE) will have to build this into the price of its products, and the company will have to pass it on to consumers, since its products are not made in the US. 98% of clothing and 99% of shoes are imported. What’s more, 60% of American sportswear comes from three countries: China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. The most profitable sports footwear is mainly produced in Vietnam. On paper, the US could impose tariffs of 64%, 46% and 37% on these countries. If the US or another target market imposes tariffs on these imports, then:

• the cost of production increases
• Nike passes on the increased costs to customers in the form of price increases
• or it is absorbed by its own profits, thus reducing its profits.

A good example of this is that in 2019, even before the Biden administration, the Trump administration had a 25% tariff increase. At that time, Nike also signed that open letter (open letter), which opposed tariffs on athletic shoes, indicating that this directly affects consumers and companies. This will be no different.

I made a kind of self-check list that confirms my thesis about the company:

1. low or zero debt: YES/PARTLY/NO
2. significant economic benefit that can be protected in the long term: YES/PART/NOT
3. excellent management: YES/PART/NOT
4. excellent indicators, significant owner value creation: YES/PART/NOT
5. the majority of the total return comes from reinvesting the cash generated, not from dividends: YES/PARTLY/NO
6. appropriate company valuation: YES/PARTLY/NO

To elaborate on the above, management has been pretty bad the past few quarters, leading to the company firing several executives. But it's a manageable problem that Nike Inc. (NKE) can fully address. A 60-year-old sportswear company that's the world's largest can probably fix.

In this case, it is not about external pressure like that of Porsche AG (P911) I wrote in my analysis, where Chinese car manufacturers are taking over the market, but about internal problems.

What I don't like is the competition in the market, and Chinese companies are not idle here either. It's easy to change clothes, there's no risk in putting on an Adidas T-shirt instead of a Nike one. Moreover, it's almost impossible to establish a monopoly in this market.

---

👛Nike Inc. (NKE) Valuation👛

In this section, I will examine the company's current valuation compared to historical values ​​and consensus fair values.

---

Rating metrics

In the two rows below you can see valuation metrics. The first row shows the current valuation, the second row shows the historical valuation. Although I don't think these metrics are particularly good - they hide a lot - they can be used as a benchmark.

• Share price (2025-05-13) 62.5 USD; P/E: 20.76; EV/EBITDA: 16.34; P/FCF: 17.64 (Based on Finchat.io)
• Historical median valuation (10-year average): P/E: 31.68; EV/EBITDA: 22.97; P/FCF: 35.78 (Based on Gurufocus)

Why don't you see a DCF model in this segment? Because each input data produces a huge variance in the output, and most of the data is an estimated value. Therefore, the valuation will never actually be a single exact number, but rather a range can be defined where the current valuation falls.

You should apply a margin of safety to this price range, according to your risk appetite. 

So don't expect an exact price, no one can say this for a stock. However, there are fair value prediction services, almost every major stock filter site has one, I have aggregated them below. However, if you want a good stock support service, you should subscribe to The Falcon Method-, entry prices are given for the stocks analyzed there.

Rating

• Peter Lynch Median P/E: $83.27
• Morningstar: $112 (5 stars)
• Gurufocus: $97.84
• AlphaSpread: 47 USD (25% overvalued compared to the base case, I think this is completely false)
• SimplyWallst: $108.42
• Valueinvesting.io: 88.68 USD
• Stock Analysis: $83.14
• Wall street estimates: 30.05-75.81=53 USD (Based on these, I took into account the average of the two extreme values:)

Average price (based on 8 ratings): 84.16 USD (23% undervalued compared to the average, at the current share price of USD 62.5)

How to interpret the numbers? The above "margin of safety" rule should be applied according to your convictions, so if you really believe in the company, you can buy it at fair value, but if you proceed in 10% increments (whose convictions are strong), the math would look like this:

• 10% margin of safety: 84.16.5*0.9=~75.744 USD
• 20% margin of safety: 84.16.5*0.8=~67.3 USD
• 30% margin of safety: 84.16.5*0.7=~58.9 USD
• 40% margin of safety: 84.16.5*0.6=50.5 USD
• 50% margin of safety: 84.16.5*0.5=~42.08 USD

Of course, the list could be continued indefinitely, but the point is that the right purchase price for you is determined by the level of your conviction.

Ultimately, however, calculating such price ranges is closer to guessing, as the forecast above shows. The Stock Analysis site aggregated the opinions of 28 experts for the next 12 months, which is most similar to predicting with a coin toss. First, we do not take positions in stocks based on fundamental analysis for a 1-year horizon, and secondly, this is simply too short a time for the thesis to play out. Nike Inc. (NKE) not only looks cheap, but it has also been deeply undervalued by the market compared to its historical values. Since these can largely be traced back to internal problems, I think this is a solvable task for the company.

---

🌗Significant news and the last quarter🌗

In this section, I will examine what happened in the last quarter, whether there were any significant news/events. If the company reports semi-annually, we examined this period.

---

Nike held its Q2025 3 report on March 20. These three months have not been a triumphant one, but it has been that way for a few quarters now.

• Income: 11.3 billion USD (-9% compared to the previous year)
• Nike's direct revenue (in stores, online): -12% compared to the previous year
• Revenue from intermediary partners: -7% compared to the previous year
• Gross margin: 41.5%, 330 basis points lower than the previous year
• Net profit: USD 800 million, -32% year-over-year
• EPS: 0.54 USD, -30% lower than last year
• Tax rate: It was 5.9%, 16.5% at this time, so this actually improves the results somewhat.

Beyond the dry data, it is worth looking at what measures are being taken to change the situation, as management said:

• "The progress we made against the 'Win Now' strategic priorities we committed to 90 days ago reinforces my confidence that we are on the right path," said Elliott Hill, President and CEO, NIKE, Inc. "What's encouraging is NIKE made an impact this quarter leading with sport – through athlete storytelling, performance products and big sport moments." - Elliot Hill, CEO
• "The operating environment is dynamic, but what matters most for NIKE is serving athletes with new product innovation and re-igniting brand momentum through sport." – Matthew Friend, CFO
• "We call these strategic priorities Win Now. The first action is to ignite our winning culture. As I mentioned, our teams are building momentum. We're hustling and being opportunistic. The next action is shaping our brand for distinction. This is about lining up storytelling power of NIKE to celebrate the passion and emotion of sport. Our third action is to accelerate a complete product portfolio. We're fully committed to creating a more breadth and depth season after season. Elevate and grow the marketplace, the fourth action is a balanced approach where we're supporting wholesale partners to drive healthy growth and returning NIKE Direct to a premium destination.. The final action, Win on the Ground, is where we celebrate local athletes, make cultural connections, and support grassroots communities.” - Elliot Hill, CEO (I cut the material so that the 5 important points from the Win Now strategy are in one place)

From the above, it is clear that the management of Nike Inc. (NKE) is trying to find its way back to the right path, and is primarily focusing on supporting athletes and innovation, which made Nike great in the past. I found the CEO's speech a bit clichéd, he didn't really have much to say about the changes, but obviously they need to be given time to mature, which could take 1-2 years.

It's a good idea to bring as many famous athletes to the forefront as possible, such as Serena Williams, who strengthen the brand's reputation, especially if they wear shoes like the Nike Pegasus Premium and the like, or the Vomero 18 aimed at amateur athletes. Of course, behind such grandiose statements, it's also worth looking at numbers like inventory turnover or whether Nike Inc. (NKE) products need to be priced lower to sell better:

• "We're already reducing the promotional days and discounting at lower rates. In fact, comparing last year's January and February to this year's, NIKE Digital in North America went from over 30 promotional days to zero." - Elliot Hill, CEO

Discounts almost always erode brand power, because if a product can be obtained cheaper, why would consumers buy it at full price? Moreover, this usually does not mean excess demand, but excess supply. If the consumer does not feel that it is worth getting a product even at a high price, and does not have to compete with other consumers for it, then the brand loses its sense of privilege.

The inventory turnover rate is important because the more often the warehouses are replenished, the greater the demand for the company's products. If there is no turnover, the warehouse acts as dead capital, so a higher number is better. 

Of course, a value that is too high is not healthy either, as it shows that the size of the inventory is not large enough compared to demand. So, there is no clear number for what is good, but below 3 is generally considered low in the apparel industry. To do this, you need to know how Nike Inc. (NKE)'s inventory has changed over the past few years, which you can see in the image below:

What else do you see in the picture? The metrics of VF Corp. (VFC), which is also a clothing company and has been in trouble for years, have also dropped below 2. This means that the warehouses did not have to be replenished twice in 1 year, which is very far from Nike Inc. (NKE). The fluctuation is relatively insignificant, so they basically buy Nike Inc. (NKE) products, but the situation could be much better.

Next report: 2025.06.26

---

✨Other interesting facts about Nike Inc. (NKE)✨

Everything that was left out of the previous ones, or if there is any special KPI - key performance indicator - or concept that needs to be explained, is included here.

---

Converse, the biggest success: The Converse brand was purchased by Nike Inc. (NKE) in 2003 for $305 million. This is one of the company's best investments, as in 2024 they had $2.1 billion in revenue from the brand and generated roughly $500 million in profit, which is higher than the original purchase price.

Umbro, the biggest mistake: In 2008, Nike Inc. (NKE) purchased the Umbro brand for $565 million, which it sold to Iconix Brand Group for $225 million in 2012.

🔑Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)🔑

Regional revenue data: The fastest growing market is China, but the competition is also the greatest here, with Chinese companies coming up at a tremendous pace. Since the market size has tripled in 10 years, the number of consumers is incredibly high, and the state supports sports investments, I would be watching closely how Nike Inc. (NKE) performs in this market.

Shoes and other clothing items: Nike Inc. (NKE) generates two-thirds of its revenue from its footwear, which was roughly $30 billion in 2024, while other apparel products accounted for $17 billion. The higher margin is also on footwear, so these revenue figures should be closely monitored.

Distribution between sales channels: Nike Inc. (NKE) neglected its sales partners and shifted consumers to the online space, which did not work out so well. In other words, if the revenue coming through intermediary partners does not start to increase further, then the mismanagement will continue.

Nike Inc. (NKE) Summary

Summary of the analysis, drawing lessons.

---

Nike Inc. (NKE) is the leader in its own market, they have the largest share. But sportswear is a highly competitive industry, you can't really create monopolies, the economic moats come almost entirely from brand power. That is, consumers prefer Nike Inc. (NKE) products more than, say, Adidas, Puma or more recently, sportswear from Chinese brands, Anta and Li-Ning. In the past 1 year, Nike Inc. (NKE) shares have fallen by 30%, which is mostly due to internal problems and mismanagement, which can be dealt with in-house, unlike, say, Porsche AG. (P911) with problems. Of course, tariffs hang over every sporting goods manufacturer like a sword of Damocles, but this impact affects everyone. I find it hard to imagine that Nike Inc. (NKE) would not overcome its own problems within 1-2 years, which is why the current valuation is attractive, but this is not a short-term problem, it needs time to eliminate operational errors at the company.

---

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Which broker should I choose to buy shares?

There are several aspects to consider when choosing a broker - we will write a complete article about this - but I would like to highlight a few that are worth considering:

• size, reliability: The bigger a broker, the safer it is. Those with a banking background – Erste, K&H, Charles Schwab, etc. – are even better, and well-known brokers are typically more reliable.
• expenditures: Brokers operate with various costs, such as the account management fee, the portfolio fee - which is the worst cost -, the purchase/sale fee and the currency exchange cost (if USD is not deposited in the brokerage account)
• Availability of instruments: It doesn't matter which broker has which market available, or whether they add the given instrument upon request and how quickly.
• account type: cash or margin account, the latter can only be used for options. For Hungarian tax residents, having a TBSZ account is important, but citizens of other countries also have special options – such as the American 401K retirement savings account – which are either supported by the broker or not.
• surface: is one of the most underrated aspects, and it can be a real pain. Anyone who had an account with Random Capital, a now-defunct Hungarian broker, knows what it's like to work on a platform left over from the 90s. Erste's system is lousy slow, Interactive Brokers requires a flight test, and LightYear believes in simple but modern solutions.

Based on the above, I recommend the Interactive Brokers account because:

• the world's largest broker with a strong background
• a few million instruments are available on it, and shares listed on multiple markets – e.g. both the original and the ADR – of a single share are often available
• Interactive Brokers is a discount broker, they have the lowest prices on the market
• you can link your Wise account to them, from which you can quickly transfer money
• Morningstar's analyses are available for free under the fundamental explorer (good for analysis)
• EVA framework data is available under fundamental explorer (useful for analysis)
• they have both cash and margin accounts, Hungarian citizens can open a TBSZ
• you can use three types of interfaces: there is a web and PC client and a phone application

---

What data sources did you use to analyze stocks?

For quantitative analysis, we primarily use various stock screening sites, and for qualitative analysis, we use company reports and other analyses, such as the Substack channel, podcasts - Business Breakdowns - and similar sources.

---

What matters: value or quality?

The answer is both, but quality is more important. It is much better to buy a very high-quality company at a fair price than to buy shares of a cheap but poor-quality company.

---

What is the best time frame to buy shares?

The minimum is 5 years, but you should consider the time horizon from 10 years to infinity. Our approach is typical "buy and hold", the emphasis is on selection, then we try to hold the shares for as long as possible, which requires conviction. We rarely sell, mainly if we feel that the thesis we set up has been broken or if we have made a mistake.

---

Which is better: individual stocks or ETFs?

There is no truth to this question. It is very easy to track the market with an S&P 500 ETF, and it is worth doing for beginners, because it can be done with a little knowledge and practice. Analyzing individual stocks requires 30-50 hours per company, so we do not recommend it to those who do not like it.

---

Do you hold the shares in a TBSZ account?

Yes. As a Hungarian citizen, the tax advantage over a traditional cash-based account is so great that it is worth opening a new TBSZ account every year, and then the withdrawal of money is also solved (but if you do not want to withdraw anything from it, you can extend these)

---

Why don't you specify a specific purchase price for the shares in your analyses?

We do not set purchase prices for several reasons: firstly, because it is impossible to calculate the exact value of a company. Secondly, because we cannot give investment advice, these analyses are only made to support the decisions of others. That is why we use fair value estimates from other services, as well as a certain margin of safety. Ultimately, your conviction will decide how much a company is worth to you.

---

Which stock price will rise or fall?

Nobody knows, because there is no magic bullet that can tell. It can be based on mathematical probabilities. The prices of high-quality companies that have growing sales, are able to reinvest the cash generated into the business, and have high intrinsic value creation tend to rise in the long term. But in the short term – a few years – the market and the price can move anywhere.

---

Legal and liability statement (aka. disclaimer): My articles contain personal opinions and are written solely for my own entertainment and that of my readers. iO ChartsThe articles appearing on this website do NOT in any way exhaust the scope of investment advice. I have never intended, do not intend, and am unlikely to provide such advice in the future. The information provided here is for informational purposes only and should NOT be construed as an offer. The expression of opinion is NOT a guarantee to buy or sell financial instruments. You are SOLELY responsible for the decisions you make, and no one else, including me, assumes the risk.