olivLaw · European equity research
Kesko Oyj KESKOB.HE
Finland · Nasdaq Helsinki · Vertical: Listed companies from Finland
Kesko Oyj is a Finnish wholesale and retail group operating three business areas, and it is in transition toward ESRS-based sustainability reporting. Its 2025 annual report shows a well-defined sustainability governance structure, with targets on greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity.
At the close of 05 Nov 2026, Kesko Oyj (KESKOB.HE) stock was 26.58 EUR (−0.08% on the day), with market capitalisation 10.5 bn EUR, P/E 26.1 on diluted EPS of 1.02 EUR over the last 12 months, dividend yield 3.39%, beta 0.27, 52-week range 17.85–26.60 EUR.
Data as of · AI analysis dated · Source: ESEF annual reports and closing prices, computed by olivLaw.
Price history
Loading chart…
Technical reading
- RSI (14)
- 81.5
- overbought (≥ 70)
- Bollinger (20, 2)
- 22.59 – 26.96
- in the upper half of the band · %B 0.91 · band width 17.6%
- SMA 50 / 200
- 23.44 / 21.24
- uptrend (price > SMA50 > SMA200)
- MACD (12, 26, 9)
- 0.88 / 0.75
- MACD above signal
Indicators describe past prices; on their own they do not predict direction. On our history the RSI ≤ 40 filter added no return (see the signals methodology).
Performance
| Company | EURO STOXX 50 | vs EURO STOXX 50 | Vertical median | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | +16.9% | +0.4% | +16.5 pp | — |
| 3 months | +23.7% | −3.3% | +27.0 pp | — |
| 6 months | +28.0% | +4.0% | +24.1 pp | — |
| Year to date | +38.1% | +8.1% | +30.0 pp | — |
| 1 year | +46.5% | +10.7% | +35.8 pp | −1.2% |
| 3 years | +60.8% | +50.1% | +10.7 pp | +6.8% |
| 5 years | −9.2% | +43.6% | −52.8 pp | — |
Price returns, dividends excluded.
Quarterly results
ESEF annual reports carry no quarters: the results are annual (below).
E/P over time
E/P = trailing-12-month diluted EPS / price at quarter end. E/P is the inverse of P/E and stays defined when earnings are negative.
Today's P/E sits at the 100 percentile of its own 2-quarter history (min 18.9, median 19.0, max 19.1; quarters with earnings only).
Fiscal years
| Fiscal year | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 11.9 bn | 12.5 bn |
| Revenue YoY | unavailable | +4.7% |
| Net income | 379.1 m | 404.2 m |
| Net income YoY | unavailable | +6.6% |
| Diluted EPS | 0.95 | 1.02 |
| Diluted EPS YoY | unavailable | +7.4% |
| net % | 3.2% | 3.2% |
| Free cash flow | unavailable | unavailable |
Balance sheet & financial health
Fiscal year 2025 · 31 Dec 2025
- Cash
- 166.2 m EUR
- Financial debt
- unavailable EUR
- Net debt
- unavailable EUR
- Equity
- 2.8 bn EUR
- Total assets
- 8.8 bn EUR
- Debt / equity
- unavailable
- Current ratio
- unavailable
- ROE
- 14.5%
- ROA
- 4.7%
- FCF margin
- unavailable
Financial statements (source on every figure)
Revenue and net income (EUR)
Margins
Income statement · EUR
| Line | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 11.9 bn | 12.5 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Operating income | 579.5 m | 631.3 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Pre-tax income | 471.5 m | 510.3 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Income tax | 92.0 m | 105.5 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Net income | 379.1 m | 404.2 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Diluted EPS | 0.95 | 1.02 | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Dividend per share | 0.80 | 0.90 | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
Balance sheet · EUR
| Line | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cash | 473.1 m | 166.2 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Inventories | 1.1 bn | 1.2 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Property, plant & equipment, net | 2.4 bn | 2.8 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Goodwill | 643.0 m | 721.6 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Intangibles (excl. goodwill) | 234.2 m | 212.5 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Total assets | 8.5 bn | 8.8 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Total liabilities | 5.7 bn | 6.0 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Equity | 2.7 bn | 2.8 bn | esef· 04 Mar 2026verified |
| Shares outstanding at year end | 399.1 m | 396.3 m | esef· 04 Mar 2026derived |
Cash flow · EUR
Computed indicators
Growth
Profitability
Returns
Balance sheet
Liquidity
Cash
Efficiency
Market and valuation
1 indicators that do not apply to the sector.
Valuation
olivLaw classification
- indicators available: 3 of at least 6
- score weight coverage: 22.9% of at least 60%
A scoring methodology on indicators and valuation, not investment advice.
Closing price
05 Nov 2026Source: olivLaw, closing series
Market cap: 10.5 bn EUR
Key indicators
Coverage and freshness
Score by group
23% · Insufficient data
Estimated value range
The combined range = the median of the valid methods' low, central and high values; it is not a probability interval and does not cover every result. Envelope of all methods: 8.40 – 18.87 EUR.
Valuation assumptions are editorial choices, not measured; beta is not measured.
Method ranges (EUR per share)
— — Mid · ▏ Price
Valuation methods
- DCF (discounted cash flow)unavailable · input data missing
- Peers: EV/EBITDAunavailable · net debt missing: EV cannot be bridged to equity (missing debt is not zero)
- Peers: P/E8.40 – 18.87 (Mid 11.32)23 companies used · median multiple 11.1x · quartiles 8.2x – 18.5xALMA.HE, APETIT.HE, ASPO.HE, ATRAV.HE, BIOBV.HE, CAPMAN.HE, CONSTI.HE, DIGIA.HE, ELEAV.HE, ELISA.HE, ENENTO.HE, ETTE.HE, FORTUM.HE, FSECURE.HE, GLA1V.HE, GRK.HE, HARVIA.HE, ICP1V.HE, ILKKA.HE, INVEST.HE, KALMAR.HE, KAMUX.HE, KCR.HE
- Dividend discount (DDM)12.24 – 16.69 (Mid 14.12)
Assumptions (illustrative, editorial)
- Risk-free rate
- 3.0%
- Equity risk premium
- 5.5%
- Beta (default)
- 1.00
- Cost of equity
- 8.5%
- Terminal growth
- 2.0%
Factor scorecard
Insufficient data
Minimum-evidence gate: indicators available: 3 of at least 6; score weight coverage: 22.9% of at least 60%
| Factor | Value | Score | Weight used |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROIC · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net margin · Quality | 3.2% | 51 (vs peers) | 27% |
| FCF conversion · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Revenue CAGR 3Y · Growth | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| EPS CAGR 3Y · Growth | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net debt / EBITDA · Balance sheet | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Interest coverage · Balance sheet | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Current ratio · Balance sheet | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| P/E (TTM) · Valuation | 26.1x | 29 (vs peers) | 45% |
| EV/EBITDA · Valuation | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| FCF yield · Valuation | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Shareholder yield (distributions) · Returns | 3.5% | 50 (on a fixed band) | 27% |
| Payout ratio (FCF) · Returns | unavailable | unavailable | — |
Factors without a value were dropped; the remaining weights were renormalised.
Score groups
- Balance sheet· partialunavailable · 0/3 factors with a value
- Growth· partialunavailable · 0/2 factors with a value
- Quality· partial51/100 · 1/3 factors with a value
- Returns· partial50/100 · 1/2 factors with a value
- Valuation· partial29/100 · 1/3 factors with a value
A «partial» group is computed from under half of its weight or from one factor: it is not a full assessment of the group.
Memo
Kesko Oyj (KESKOB.HE). Latest full fiscal year: 2025; data up to 2025-12-31.
Figures computed from the financial statements: revenue 12.5 bn EUR in 2025; YoY growth 4.7%; net margin 3.2%; ROE 14.6%.
The estimated value range is 10.32–17.78 EUR per share (median of 2 methods, agreement: high); assumptions are illustrative. Against the central value of 12.72 EUR, the price of 26.58 EUR leaves a potential of -52.1% (value / price − 1) and a margin of safety of -108.9% (1 − price / value). The range is the median of the methods' low, central and high values, not a probability interval.
Insufficient data for a verdict (indicators available: 3 of at least 6; score weight coverage: 22.9% of at least 60%).
Text generated deterministically from the figures shown; no language model. Not investment advice.
What supports the thesis
No signal among the computed factors. That is not an absence of risk: factors without data were not assessed, and business risks (margins, inventory, demand) are in the source-based analysis.
What contradicts it
- P/E (TTM): 26.1x
- The price is above the estimated value range
Not assessed (insufficient data or a ratio without meaning): ROIC, FCF conversion, Revenue CAGR 3Y, EPS CAGR 3Y, Net debt / EBITDA, Interest coverage, Current ratio, EV/EBITDA, FCF yield, Payout ratio (FCF).
Versus the vertical median
Listed companies from Finland · same country · compared with 39 companies
Multiples and returns vs the median
Price rebased to 100 (monthly, 5 years)
Companies in the vertical
| Market cap | P/E | ROE | Net margin | Revenue YoY | 1A / 3A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FORTUM.HEFortum Oyj | 20.8 bn | 27.2 | 8.7% | 15.3% | −14.0% | +32% / +81% |
| KESKOB.HEKesko Oyj | 10.5 bn | 26.1 | 14.6% | 3.2% | +4.7% | +45% / +51% |
| ELISA.HEElisa Oyj | 5.6 bn | 16.3 | 27.0% | 15.2% | +3.0% | −8% / −15% |
| KALMAR.HEKalmar Oyj | 2.4 bn | 14.7 | 24.1% | 9.4% | +1.2% | +0% / unavailable |
| KCR.HEKonecranes Oyj | 2.2 bn | 5.6 | 20.3% | 9.5% | −0.9% | −4% / +134% |
| EXEL.HEExel Composites Oyj | 1.8 bn | — | -18.5% | -5.3% | +3.6% | +163% / +74% |
| BITTI.HEBittium Oyj | 1.2 bn | 55.8 | 17.5% | 17.9% | +40.1% | +73% / +603% |
| ALMA.HEAlma Media Oyj | 1.2 bn | 21.2 | 23.0% | 16.9% | +4.6% | +9% / +57% |
| FIA1S.HEFinnair Oyj | 927.4 m | 50.4 | 2.9% | 0.6% | +1.9% | +54% / +22% |
| GRK.HEGRK Infra Oyj | 788.5 m | 18.3 | 27.8% | 4.9% | +19.7% | +52% / unavailable |
| HARVIA.HEHarvia Oyj | 768.7 m | 29.3 | 21.0% | 13.3% | +13.5% | −1% / +64% |
| ATRAV.HEAtria Oyj | 451.7 m | 11.1 | 9.8% | 2.2% | +3.3% | +13% / +57% |
| ANORA.HEAnora Group Oyj | 317.6 m | 57.8 | 1.4% | 0.8% | −4.9% | +26% / +11% |
| CAPMAN.HECapMan Oyj | 300.2 m | 23.1 | 6.8% | 20.9% | +9.4% | −8% / −20% |
| ICP1V.HEIncap Oyj | 261.0 m | 18.7 | 10.4% | 6.5% | −6.7% | −3% / +37% |
| FSECURE.HEF-Secure Oyj | 243.7 m | 10.9 | 43.4% | 15.3% | −0.4% | −17% / −23% |
| ASPO.HEAspo Oyj | 219.4 m | 9.3 | 15.4% | 5.0% | +2.1% | +2% / +9% |
| ETTE.HEEtteplan Oyj | 173.7 m | 16.4 | 8.8% | 2.9% | +0.1% | −27% / −51% |
| DIGIA.HEDigia Oyj | 131.6 m | 10.5 | 14.5% | 5.9% | +5.5% | −16% / −12% |
| ILKKA.HEIlkka Oyj | 93.8 m | 8.1 | 6.2% | 30.8% | +22.6% | +0% / +21% |
| CONSTI.HEConsti Oyj | 77.4 m | 11.6 | 15.3% | 2.0% | +2.9% | −8% / −6% |
| APETIT.HEApetit Oyj | 75.6 m | 8.4 | 8.2% | 5.4% | +3.1% | −14% / −3% |
| ESENSE.HEEnersense International Oyj | 74.9 m | 74.7 | 3.1% | 0.4% | −27.7% | +12% / +9% |
| CTH1V.HEComponenta Oyj | 66.1 m | 324.0 | 0.8% | 0.2% | −4.6% | +49% / +182% |
| KAMUX.HEKamux Oyj | 47.4 m | 10.3 | 4.2% | 0.5% | +0.8% | −40% / −77% |
1- and 3-year price returns: for KESKOB.HE from daily closes (the same as the performance table), for the other companies from month-end closes.
olivLaw engine forecast
The world engine ran after the company's latest material disclosure. Probabilities are of TOUCHING a level within the horizon (not closing there) and sit next to the random walk (p_rw), the no-information benchmark.
The engine has no published run for this company yet.
Valuation scenarios (editable assumptions)
Illustrative scenarios
Illustrative: not forecasts and without probabilities. Each case is one coherent set of assumptions, computed on today's figures.
Estimated price (EUR)
| Estimated price | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 years | 15.74 Total return -38% · Per year -38% | 27.82 Total return 8% · Per year 8% | 41.90 Total return 62% · Per year 62% |
| 3 years | 15.32 Total return -34% · Per year -13% | 30.47 Total return 26% · Per year 8% | 50.38 Total return 104% · Per year 27% |
| 5 years | 14.91 Total return -31% · Per year -7% | 33.37 Total return 45% · Per year 8% | 60.57 Total return 154% · Per year 20% |
- Exit P/E± 7.62
- Net margin± 5.33
- Annual revenue growth± 4.37
- Annual dilution± 0.45
AI analysis
AI-generatedAI-generated analysis (Claude) from cited public sources; it may contain errors. Not investment advice. As of 27 Oct 2026 · Model: claude-haiku-5-5.
In brief
Kesko Oyj is a Finnish wholesale and retail group operating three business areas, and it is in transition toward ESRS-based sustainability reporting. Its 2025 annual report shows a well-defined sustainability governance structure, with targets on greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity.
SWOT
Strengths
- Extensive independent dealer network and a broad product range, which give flexibility in sourcing.
- Responsible sourcing policies for sensitive raw materials, applied especially to own brands.
- Well-structured sustainability governance, with board-level oversight and links to remuneration.
Weaknesses
- Dependence on the Finnish market concentrates the group's geographic risk.
- Sustainability reporting is in a complex transition, with many temporary provisions.
- Biodiversity targets are not yet tied to concrete deadlines, which limits the measurement of progress.
Opportunities
- Expanding certified sourcing could strengthen own brands and supply chains.
- Developing logistics, such as the Hyvinkää centre, could reduce costs and environmental impact.
- Simplified ESRS standards could reduce reporting costs if adopted early.
Threats
- Regulatory pressure on biodiversity could raise sourcing costs.
- Frequent changes to reporting standards may complicate data preparation.
- The risk of errors in sustainability data could affect the credibility of reporting.
Risks
- Reporting riskmedium
The complexity of sustainability data and the ESRS transition could generate reporting errors, and the report explicitly names risks related to accuracy and data precision.
- Biodiversity impacthigh
Raw materials with nature impact from agriculture or forestry could create reputational and regulatory risks for the supply chain.
- Dependence on certified suppliersmedium
Purchasing certified products may be limited by the availability of suppliers that meet standards, which could slow progress on targets.
- Regulatory changesmedium
The revision of ESRS and the uneven application of transitional provisions create uncertainty about requirements for future reporting years.
- Compliance and ethicslow
Errors in compliance processes or in incident reporting could affect the group's reputation, although the report describes control mechanisms.
Investment thesis
What would need to be true (bull case)
- If emission reduction targets are met, Kesko could demonstrate visible progress and strengthen its position in the Finnish market.
- The independent dealer network and sourcing policies could offer a competitive advantage in segments with demand for responsible products.
- Robust sustainability governance could ease the transition to the new reporting standards.
What would break the thesis
- If biodiversity regulation tightens, sourcing costs could rise significantly.
- The lack of biodiversity targets with concrete deadlines could make progress difficult to demonstrate.
- The complexity of the ESRS transition could generate additional costs and risks of reporting errors.
What to watch
- Publication of comparative 2024 sustainability data in the 2025 report2026
- Voluntary application of simplified ESRS standards and its effect on reporting2026 reporting
- Setting of biodiversity targets with concrete deadlinesnext annual report
- Progress on scope 1 and 2 emission targets linked to remuneration2026
Products, market & competition
AI-generatedAI-generated analysis (Claude) from cited public sources; it may contain errors. Not investment advice. As of 27 Oct 2026 · Model: claude-haiku-5-5.
The business
According to the annual report for the year ended 31.12.2025, Kesko has a broad product range and manages its supply chain through sustainability policies for raw materials with biodiversity impact, such as cocoa, coffee, tea, soy, palm oil, textiles and wood and paper 1. The group operates through three business areas, each with its own sustainability strategy, coordinated by a group sustainability management team. The board approves all group-level policies, and its role includes overseeing strategy and climate targets.
The sustainability governance structure includes a board with a majority of independent members, an audit committee that oversees sustainability reporting, and a remuneration committee that links part of management pay to sustainability targets. The chief executive has overall responsibility for implementing the corporate responsibility strategy.
Sustainability reporting for 2025 uses several transitional provisions under ESRS 1, and the company has not yet assessed the effect of the simplified standards proposed by EFRAG. These points mean the reporting profile is still changing.
Segments
Food trade
The food segment, which includes the independent K-Ruoka dealer network, is most exposed to responsible sourcing targets for cocoa, coffee, fish and palm oil, according to the policies described in the report.
Non-food retail and automotive
The other areas, including non-food goods and automotive logistics, have a different risk profile, and the report mentions a new logistics centre in Hyvinkää, completed in autumn 2025, for which a voluntary compensation of the nature impact was agreed.
Market context
Kesko operates mainly in the Finnish market, where most of its retail and wholesale activity takes place. The sustainability reporting framework applies there through the European CSRD directive, which entered a transition phase for the 2025 and 2026 years.
The ESRS standards are under revision, and their application is adapting to a changing regulatory environment. This context could affect compliance costs and the timing of future reports.
Trends
- Simplification of European reportingmixed
Simplified ESRS could reduce the reporting burden if the simplified standards apply from 2027, but transition costs currently remain high.
- Biodiversity pressureheadwind
Rising attention to biodiversity impact in supply chains could bring stricter controls over raw materials.
- Emission reductionstailwind
Scope 1 and 2 emission targets linked to remuneration could support operational efficiency if they are met.
- Digitalisation and AI policymixed
A new artificial intelligence policy, applicable from 2026, could create efficiency opportunities as well as compliance risks.
Competitive position
The annual report does not explicitly name competitors. The Finnish retail market includes several large food and non-food operators, and direct comparisons require data from external sources.
Kesko's differentiation rests on its independent dealer network and on responsible sourcing policies for its own brands, which could be an advantage in certain segments.
- Finnish food retail operators
Local competitors in the food segment, not identified in the official source.
- DIY and home goods chains
Competitors in the non-food goods segment, without specific data in the source.
- European retailers with certified supply chains
Competitors that use the same certification systems for their own-brand products.
- Regional Nordic distributors
Regional operators competing for sourcing and logistics in Scandinavia and Finland.
News & filings
In the press
- Kesko to Buy Dahl Scandinavia Operations in Its Largest DealBloomberg Markets · 15 Jun 2026 · EN
Annual reports (ESEF)
- Annual report 202504 Mar 2026
- Annual report 202504 Mar 2026
- Annual report 202404 Mar 2026
Sources
- [1] Annual report, fiscal year ended 2025-12-31 (ESEF) · SEC / Kesko Oyj · 31 Dec 2025
Figures computed by olivLaw from ESEF annual reports and closing prices; the qualitative analysis is AI-generated from cited sources. Not investment advice.