Research Notes

Stay informed with the most recent market and company research insights.

A man sitting at a table with a glass of orange juice.

Research Notes

Consistent delivery

Tasmea
3:27pm
February 25, 2025
1H25 was strong with growth continuing apace (EBITDA +37% YoY and EBIT +44%). Divisionally, there were the usual swings and roundabouts which highlight TEA’s diversified business strategy. FY25 statutory NPAT guidance was upgraded from $m to $52m, which looked as though it was entirely driven by a $4m one-off tax benefit; however, this now includes the cost of employee incentive plans (approved in November). We make minor adjustments to our forecasts. Based on continued earnings growth, supported by a conservative balance sheet and constructive industry tailwinds, we retain our ADD rating, increasing our 12-month target price to $3.65ps (previously $3.60/sh).

Cost growth outstrips revenue growth

Adrad Holdings
3:27pm
February 25, 2025
AHL’s 1H25 result overall was below expectations with revenue growth more than offset by significantly higher costs. EBITDA for Distribution dropped 20% while Heat Transfer Solutions (HTS) fell 3%. Management expects continued revenue growth in 2H25 but has no longer provided guidance for earnings growth. Previous guidance was for FY25 revenue and earnings to be above FY24 (weighted to 2H25). We decrease FY25-25F EBITDA by between 15-16%. Our target price declines to $0.85 (from $1.10) and we move to a Speculative Buy rating (from Add previously). While we continue to believe the long-term growth prospects for AHL remain solid as the company pursues ongoing opportunities in the aftermarket, mining, power generation and data centre segments in addition to further rationalisation of the manufacturing footprint, earnings may be volatile in the short term due to the project nature of HTS. Some patience is required but trading on 9.0x FY26F PE and 4.3% yield with a healthy balance sheet (1H25 net cash of $18.4m), we think the stock remains an attractive investment opportunity for more risk-tolerant investors. Strong execution from management however remains the key, in our view.

Some signs of life

NIB Holdings
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
NHF’s 1H25 NPAT figure was in line with consensus (A$83m), but the group underlying operating profit ($106m) was 8% ahead of consensus (A$98m). Broadly this was a positive result, with evidence that the company may be through the worst in regards to the recent claims spikes in both its Australian Residential Health Insurance and NZ businesses. We lower our NHF FY25F/FY26F EPS by 4%-7% noting our near-term forecasts were a bit optimistic in certain areas, and we have pulled them back based on the detailed guidance management provided. Our target price is set at A$7.06. We think NHF is a quality franchise, but today’s share price recovery has reduced upside in the name in our view. We move back to a HOLD call.

1H25: Painting a more positive narrative

APA Group
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
The 1H25 result included an earnings/cashflow beat, no change to FY25 EBITDA/DPS guidance, cost-out initiatives, and balance sheet capacity to fund a bullish growth capex outlook (with greater emphasis on gas infrastructure projects). Mild forecast upgrades. 12 month target price lifts 8 cps to $7.21. 8.1% cash yield. HOLD at current prices, with 12 month potential TSR 9% and 5 year IRR 8.6% pa.

P&L stabilised, with trough earnings and multiple

PeopleIn
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
Despite flagging that conditions remain challenging, PPE’s 1H25 result looks to reflect a business stabilising. QoQ normalised EBITDA showed continued trading momentum, with 2Q25 results consistent with 2024 levels. So while billed hours and placement fees declined yoy across most divisions, EBITDA remained relatively stable (-4% vs pcp) as costs declined on the back of recent technology-led efficiency gains. The balance sheet continues to improve with total net debt reducing to $61.9m ($79.3m in Jun-24) as strong cash collections reduced the net debt ratio to 1.7x (2.1x in Jun-24). This cyclical business has suffered in recent years as margin compression saw EPS decline from 20.7cps in 1H23 to 9.7cps in 1H25. However, with EBITDA margins plateauing at 3.5%, we believe FY25 will mark the nadir in earnings, with the business trading on cyclically low earnings and a cyclical low multiple of 8.8x (NTM) EPS. On this basis we upgrade to an Add rating a $1.40/sh price target.

Stable structure – now to build some growth

IRESS
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
IRE reported adjusted EBITDA of A$132.8m, +25% and in-line with expectations. Result composition was mixed, with the core AUS Wealth division down 13% HOH; offset by the UK +49%. Other divisions were relatively stable HOH. FY25 Adjusted EBITDA guidance was provided at A$127-135m (the bottom-end in-line with annualised 2H24 continuing ops performance). Whilst this points to modest growth, IRE is reinvesting cost savings (and higher capex) into revenue growth initiatives. The success of these is key to medium-term (FY26+) growth. IRE’s earnings are more defendable; free cash flow has improved; and the balance sheet strength adds longer-term optionality. In our view, the valuation point implies low growth persists, which provides a strong ‘option’ on management execution.

Outlook and balance sheet looking solid

SKS Technologies Group
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
SKS reported a strong 1H25 result, delivering NPAT of $5.8m (up 216% on the pcp), a ~13.7% beat vs MorgansF $5.1m. The company delivered solid PBT margin expansion and record cash generation, ending the period with cash of $19.6m. The group also upgraded its FY25 guidance and is now expecting PBT of ~$18.2m. We upgrade our FY25-27F EPS forecasts by 7%/5%/2% respectively to reflect the upgrade to SKS revised margin guidance. This sees our blended DCF/P/E-based price target increase to $2.30 (from $2.15) and we maintain our Add rating.

It’s now a 5-year marathon, not a sprint

NEXTDC
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
NXT’s 1H25 result and outlook were largely as expected. The key challenge for investors remains the tradeoff between NXT investing now to setup the business for a much greater size (higher OPEX now) and the fact that they are investing ahead of revenue growth (higher OPEX is a short-term EBITDA drag). NXT needs to execute well now, on commitments already made, to remain a preferred digital supplier, and continue benefiting from the decades of digital infrastructure growth which is yet to come. Incidentally, a ~$200m+ increase in revenue is already contracted so this is just a timing challenge. We see building a solid foundation as the best way to create value, but acknowledge it can create a jittery investor base, in the short term. Add retained, PT reduced to $18.80.

1H25 Result: Getting comfortable

Adairs
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
Adairs’ 1H25 result was broadly in line with our expectations, with underlying EBIT (pre-AASB 16) up 10% to $33.0m. This was driven by strong sales in Adairs and Mocka Australia, offset by weakness in Focus and Mocka NZ. Margins were well managed driven by cost efficiencies from the National Distribution Centre (NDC) and implementation of the new warehouse management system. The positive trading momentum in Adairs has continued into the second half with sales up an impressive 15.2%; we expect this to moderate for the balance of the half. Ongoing efficiencies in the NDC will help offset inflationary cost pressures and margin headwinds. We forecast EBIT for Adairs brand just shy of 10%. We have revised our EBIT down 3% and 4% respectively, but have increased our price target 10c to $2.85 based on higher peer multiples. We retain our ADD rating.

1H25 Result: Don’t dream it’s over

Lovisa
3:27pm
February 24, 2025
The pace of store rollout has started to accelerate after a period of consolidation, notably in the US over the past two years. We believe Lovisa is poised to hit the landmark of 1,000 stores before the end of the current half, possibly by the time the outgoing CEO Victor Herrero hands over the reins on 31 May. This underscores what we see as the most important element of the Lovisa investment case: the business has a subscale presence in almost every one of the 50 markets in which it operates and significant long-term growth potential in each. We believe the platform for long-term growth is getting stronger all the time. We reiterate our ADD rating. Our target price moves from $36 to $35. LFL sales in 1H25 were less than we had expected at +0.1% (MorgansF: +1.0%) but accelerated to +3.7% in the first 7 weeks of 2H25. This flowed through to 3% lower EBIT than forecast, despite gross margins exceeding our estimate by 90 bps. Lead coverage of Lovisa transfers to Emily Porter with this note.

News & Insights

Michael Knox outlines the economic outlook for growth and inflation in the U.S., the Euro area, China, India, and Australia, drawing data from the International Monetary Fund, the Congressional Budget Office, European sources, and his own analysis for Australia.

Today, I’m presenting the first page of my updated presentation, which focuses on GDP growth and inflation expectations for major economies. Before diving into that, I want to clarify a point about U.S. trade negotiations that has confused some media outlets.

In the previous Trump Administration ,there was single trade negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, held a cabinet position with the rank of Ambassador. This time, to expedite negotiations and give them more weight, Trump has appointed two additional cabinet-level officials to handle trade talks with different regions. For Asian economies, Scott Bessent and Ambassador Jamison Greer, who succeeded Lighthizer and previously served on the White House staff, are managing negotiations, including those with China. For Europe, Howard Lutnick, the Commerce Secretary, and Ambassador Greer are negotiating with the European Trade Representative. When the EU representative visits Washington, D.C., they meet with Lutnick and Greer, while Chinese or Japanese representatives engage with Bessent and Greer.

In my presentation today, I’m outlining the economic outlook for growth and inflation in the U.S., the Euro area, China, India, and Australia, drawing data from the International Monetary Fund, the Congressional Budget Office, European sources, and my own analysis for Australia.

For the U.S., the best-case scenario is a soft landing, with growth slowing but remaining positive at 1.3% this year and rising to 1.7% next year. This slowdown allows the Federal Reserve to continue cutting interest rates, leading to a decline in the U.S. dollar. This in turn ,triggers a recovery in commodity prices. These prices have stabilized and are now trending upward, with an expected acceleration as the dollar weakens.

U.S. headline inflation is projected to be just below 3% next year, with higher figures this year driven by tariff effects.



Global Economic Perspective

In the Euro area, growth is accelerating slightly, from just under 1% this year to 1.2% next year, with inflation expected to hit the 2% target this year and dip to 1.9% next year.

China’s GDP growth is forecast  at 4% for both this year and next, a step down from previous 5% rates, reflecting a significant slump in domestic demand and very low inflation  Chinese Inflation is only  :   0.2% last year, 0.4% this year, and 0.9% next year.  Despite a massive fiscal push, with a budget deficit around 8% of GDP, China’s debt-to-GDP ratio is rising faster than the U.S.. Yet this is  yielding more modest  domestic growth.

India, on the other hand, continues to outperform, with 6.5% GDP growth last year, 6.2% this year, and  6.3%  next year, surpassing earlier projections.

Read more
In our International Reporting Season Review, we provide an overview of the March 2025 quarterly results season for companies in the Americas, Europe and Asia.

Positive earnings surprise

In our International Reporting Season Review, we provide an overview of the March 2025 quarterly results season for companies in the Americas, Europe and Asia. For all the volatility in markets caused by US trade policy, the results were positive. For all the 187 high profile and blue-chip companies in our International Watchlist, the median EPS beat vs consensus was 3.2%, nearly twice that recorded in the December quarter (1.8%). 37% of companies exceeded consensus EPS expectations by more than 5% and only 9% missed by more than 5%. Communication Services was the most positive sector, led by Magnificent 7 companies Alphabet and Meta Platforms. The median EPS beat in that sector was 13%. Consumer Discretionary was the biggest disappointment (though only a mild one) with EPS falling 0.6% short of analyst estimates on a median basis.

Alphabet and Meta among the best performers

Across our Watchlist, some of the best performing stocks in terms of EPS beats were Alphabet, Boeing, Uniqlo-owner Fast Retailing, Meta Platforms, Newmont and The Walt Disney Company. Notable misses came from insurance broker Aon, BP, PepsiCo, Starbucks, Tesla and UnitedHealth. The latter saw by far the worst share price performance over reporting season, its earnings weakness compounded by the resignation of its CEO and the launch of a fraud investigation by the Department of Justice. British luxury fashion label Burberry had the best performing share price as it gains traction in its turnaround plan.

Tariffs were the main talking point (of course)

The timing of President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ on 2 April, just before the March quarter results started rolling in, guaranteed that US tariffs would be the main talking point throughout reporting season. Most companies took the line that higher tariffs presented a material risk to global growth and inflation. The rapidly shifting sands of US trade policy mean the impact of tariffs is highly uncertain. This didn’t stop many companies from trying to estimate the impact on their profits. This ranged from the very precise ($850m said RTX) to the extremely vague (‘a few hundred million dollars’ hazarded Abbott Laboratories). The rehabilitation of AI as a systemic driver of long-term value was a key theme of reporting season, with many companies reporting what Palantir Technologies described as an ‘unstoppable whirlwind of demand’ and others indicating an increase in planned AI investment. The deterioration in consumer confidence was another key talking point, though most companies could only express concern about a possible future softening in demand rather than any actual evidence of a hit to sales.

Our International Focus List continues to outperform

In this report, we also report on the performance of the Morgans International Focus List, which is now up 25.3% since inception last year, outperforming the benchmark S&P 500 by 20.4%.


Morgans clients receive exclusive insights such as access to our latest International Reporting Season article.

Contact us today to begin your journey with Morgans.

      
Contact us
      
      
Find an adviser
      
Read more
The U.S. and China, through negotiations led by the Chinese Deputy Premier and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, agreed to a 90-day tariff reduction from over 125% to 30% and 10% respectively

US and Chinese actions had led to an unintended embargo of trade between the world’s two largest economies.

In recent days there has been discussion of the temporary “cease fire” in the tariff war between the US and China.

The situation was that both countries had levied tariffs on each other more than 125%. This had led to a mutual embargo of trade between the two world is two largest economies. Then as a result of negotiation between the Deputy Premier of China and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent both China and the US agreed to a 90 day pause in “hostilities” where both sides agreed to reduce the US tariff on the China to 30 percent and the Chinese tariff on the US to 10%.

Some suggested that this meant that “China had won” others suggested that the “US had won.” To us this really suggests that both parties were playing in a different game. The was a game in which both sides had won.

To understand why this is the case we must understand a little of the theory of this type of competition. Economists usually use discuss competition in terms of markets where millions of people are involved. In such a case we find a solution by finding the intersection of supply and demand which model the exchange between vast numbers of people.

But here we are ware talking of a competition where only two parties are involved.

When exceedingly small numbers like this are involved, we find the solution to the competition by what is called “Game Theory.”

In this game there are only two players. One is called China, and the other is called the US. Game theory teaches us that are there three different types of games. The first is a zero-sum game. In this game there two sides are competing over a fixed amount of product. Again, this is called " A zero sum game “. Either one party gets a bigger share of the total sum at stake and the other side gets less. This zero-sum game is how most of the Media views the competition between the US and China.

A second form is a decreasing sum game. An example of this is a war. Some of the total amount that is fought over is destroyed in the process. Usually both sides will wind up worse than when they started.

Then there is a third form. This form is called an ‘increasing sum game.’ This is where both sides cooperate so that the total sum in the game grows because of this cooperation. We think that what happened in the US and China negotiation was an increasing sum game.

As Scott Bessent said at the Saudi Investment Forum in Riyadh soon after the agreement was signed, “both sides came with a clear agenda with shared interests and great mutual respect.”

He said, “after the weekend, we now have a mechanism to avoid escalation like we had before. We both agreed to bring the tariff levels down by 115% which I think is very productive because where we were with 145% and 125% was an unintended embargo. That is not healthy for the two largest economies in the world.”

He went on, “when President Trump began the tariff program, we had a plan, we had a process. What we did not have with the Chinese was a mechanism. The Vice Premier and I now call this the ‘Geneva mechanism’”.

Both sides cooperated to make both sides better off. Bessent added “what we do not want, and both sides agreed, is a generalised decoupling between the two largest economies in the world. What we want is the US to decouple in strategic industries, medicine, semiconductors, other strategic areas. As to other countries; we have had very productive discussions with Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Taiwan, Thailand. Europe may have collective action problems with the French wanting one thing and the Italians wanting a different thing. but I am confident that with Europe, we will arrive at a satisfactory conclusion.

We have a very good framework. I think we can proceed from here.”

What we think we can see here is that the United States and China have cooperated to both become better off. This is what we call an increasing sum game.

They will continue their negotiation using that approach. This will do much to allay the concerns that so many had about the effect of these new tariffs.

Read more