StockAnalyzer

Financial Analysis

DashboardSectorsComparablesScreenerUniverseMicrocapsAI 2nd OrderTheme MapEnergy & MaterialsMacroWatchlistCompareMi CarteraPortfolio

Recent

v0.1
SIBEK.ST$53.00+1.15%
Fair $53.00+0.0%

SIBEK.ST

SIBEK.ST

Industrials / Security & Protection ServicesStockholm

$53.00

+0.60 (+1.15%)

Fairly Valued+0.0%Fair Value $53.00Fund rank 32/100 · Data gapFallback financials|
SA 50/C
F-Score: 4/9

FCF base 3Y

n/d

n/d CAGR · yield n/d

FCF base 5Y

n/d

n/d base · n/d expected

Precio de entrada

n/d

MOS 24% · confianza 25%

FCF escenarios

weak_data · normalized FCF $18.3M · quality 60.0/100

Data gap 32/100
Bear 5Yn/dn/d
Base 5Yn/dn/d
Bull 5Yn/dn/d
Return 0/100Downside 20/100Model quality 74/100Data QA 20/100

Ranking barato/determinista: CAGR esperado 5Y + downside bear + calidad del modelo + balance + capital allocation + data gate. No entra en buy-candidate si la data es débil o el CAGR 5Y no compensa.

Quality + valuation scorecard

SA Score

50/100

C

Piotroski

4/9

balance/quality

Valuation

50/100

+0.0% upside

5Y CAGR

+0.0%

50/100

Data QA

16/100

SEC 0%

Latest source: unknownPeriods: 4Warnings: 0unknown: 4
No SEC-backed annual rows; valuation uses fallback financial data. Insufficient audited annual history (<3 SEC-backed years); composite fair value and forward targets are disabled until manually verified.
Thesis & Journal · SIBEK.STLocal privado en este navegador · SIBEK.ST
Plantilla tipo buy-side: tesis, bull/base/bear, catalizadores, riesgos, kill criteria y fecha de revisión. Esto no gasta GPT-5.5; luego lo usamos como contexto del memo.

Sin guardar todavía.

Market Cap

$538M

P/E

23.2x

↑

EV/EBITDA

19.4x

↑

ROE

36.5%

↑

Gross Margin

78.1%

↑

Debt/Equity

N/A

•
52-Week Range$53
$33$55

TradingView lightweight chart

SIBEK.ST price, volumen y niveles de valoración

Último $52.80Periodo +220.0%
Fair value: $53.00

Price & Ratios

Absolute Values (Left Axis)

Ratios / Percentages (Right Axis)

Financial statement dashboard

Crecimiento, márgenes y provenance

2022–2025 · 3 años de histórico normalizado

Revenue CAGR

+13.9%

FCF CAGR

+52.3%

FCF margin

14.6%

FCF / Net income

1.12x

Latest source

Provider fallback

Margin decomposition

Último año: revenue $158.6M · net income $20.8M · FCF $23.2M

2022-FY → 2025-FY

Gross margin

78.1%+3.9% pts

Operating margin

15.9%-3.1% pts

Net margin

13.1%-1.9% pts

FCF margin

14.6%+8.5% pts
MetricTTM
2025
2024
2023
2022
Income Statement
Revenue$158.6M$158.6M$143.7M$118.0M$107.2M
Net Income$20.8M$20.8M$16.5M$12.0M$16.1M
EBITDA$25.5M$25.5M$20.1M$15.4M$20.7M
EPS——1.631.171.57
Gross Margin78.1%78.1%79.2%78.6%74.2%
Operating Margin15.9%15.9%13.9%12.5%19.0%
Net Margin13.1%13.1%11.5%10.2%15.0%
Balance Sheet
Current Ratio2.722.72———
Cash Flow
Free Cash Flow$23.2M$23.2M$12.9M$18.3M$6.6M
Returns
ROE36.5%36.5%34.3%36.6%43.7%
Valuation
P/E23.1623.1615.15——
EV/EBITDA19.4319.4310.61——
P/B9.449.445.06——
Growth & Yield
Revenue Growth10.4%10.4%21.8%10.1%—
EPS Growth——39.2%-25.4%—
Dividend Yield3.6%3.6%———

Revenue, Net Income & Free Cash Flow ($B)

Margins (%)

Returns (%)

Leverage & Liquidity

Reverse DCF · market-implied EPS growthterminal P/E 15.0x · COE 10.0%
Reverse DCF requires positive EPS; loss-making or zero-EPS companies cannot produce a clean EPS hurdle.

Qué te dice: cuánto EPS CAGR está descontando el precio si sales al múltiplo terminal indicado. Si el growth observado queda por debajo, el mercado está pidiendo una ejecución muy fina.

Return attribution · 1Y approxreconcilia total +39.0%

Total return

+39.0%

Start / end P/E

n/dx → n/dx

EPS bridge

1.63 → n/d

Residual

+35.4%

EPS growthn/d
Multiple reratingn/d
Dividend+3.6%
Residual / FX / buybacks / cross-term+35.4%

EPS/multiple decomposition requires positive EPS at both endpoints; residual absorbs price move not explained by dividends.

Simple additive decomposition: total return = EPS growth contribution + P/E multiple contribution + dividend contribution + explicit residual. The residual captures cross-terms, buybacks/share-count effects, FX, special dividends, data noise and methodology mismatch so the bridge always reconciles.