olivLaw · European equity research
Norse Atlantic ASA NORSE.OL
Norway · Euronext Oslo Børs · ISIN NO0012885252 · Vertical: Listed companies from Norway
Norse Atlantic ASA operates Boeing 787 aircraft on its own scheduled routes and on long-term ACMI contracts, a mix that could stabilise its revenue. It is now pursuing a rights issue and a bridge loan amid volatile jet fuel prices, and the going concern assumption remains subject to uncertainty.
At the close of 06 Nov 2026, Norse Atlantic ASA (NORSE.OL) stock was 0.23 NOK (+4.11% on the day), with beta 1.07, 52-week range 0.21–7.63 NOK.
Data as of · AI analysis dated · Source: ESEF annual reports and closing prices, computed by olivLaw.
Price history
Loading chart…
Technical reading
- RSI (14)
- 38.4
- weak (30–45)
- Bollinger (20, 2)
- 0.19 – 0.30
- in the lower half of the band · %B 0.33 · band width 41.1%
- SMA 50 / 200
- 0.27 / 1.96
- downtrend (price < SMA50 < SMA200)
- MACD (12, 26, 9)
- -0.02 / -0.02
- MACD below 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 | −23.0% | −0.6% | −22.3 pp | — |
| 3 months | −43.0% | −4.2% | −38.8 pp | — |
| 6 months | −87.6% | +4.3% | −91.9 pp | — |
| Year to date | −96.6% | +7.5% | −104.1 pp | — |
| 1 year | −96.9% | +9.9% | −106.8 pp | −5.7% |
| 3 years | −98.2% | +49.8% | −148.1 pp | +15.0% |
| 5 years | −99.5% | +42.8% | −142.3 pp | — |
Price returns, dividends excluded.
Quarterly results
ESEF annual reports carry no quarters: the results are annual (below).
E/P over time
the price (USD) and the reports are in different currencies
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.
Fiscal years
| Fiscal year | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| Revenue YoY | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| Net income | -168.7 m | -135.5 m | -61.9 m |
| Net income YoY | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| Diluted EPS | -2.50 | -1.05 | -0.41 |
| Diluted EPS YoY | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| net % | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| Free cash flow | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
Balance sheet & financial health
Fiscal year 2025 · 31 Dec 2025
- Cash
- 17.6 m USD
- Financial debt
- 36.0 m USD
- Net debt
- 18.5 m USD
- Equity
- -260.0 m USD
- Total assets
- 913.9 m USD
- Debt / equity
- unavailable
- Current ratio
- 0.41x
- ROE
- unavailable
- ROA
- -6.4%
- FCF margin
- unavailable
Financial statements (source on every figure)
Revenue and net income (USD)
Income statement · USD
| Line | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating income | -135.2 m | -97.0 m | -20.1 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Depreciation & amortisation | 84.1 m | 87.9 m | 76.6 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| EBITDA | -51.1 m ≈ | -9.1 m ≈ | 56.5 m ≈ | esef· 21 Oct 2026derived |
| Pre-tax income | -168.6 m | -135.1 m | -61.3 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Income tax | 144.0 k | 379.0 k | 648.0 k | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Net income | -168.7 m | -135.5 m | -61.9 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Diluted EPS | -2.50 | -1.05 | -0.41 | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
≈ computed by olivLaw from the reported lines of the same year: Operating income + Depreciation & amortisation.
Balance sheet · USD
| Line | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash | 54.8 m | 22.9 m | 17.6 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Inventories | 3.5 m | 4.6 m | 6.3 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Current assets | 147.6 m | 154.8 m | 141.9 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Property, plant & equipment, net | 898.9 m | 824.7 m | 703.4 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Intangibles (excl. goodwill) | 3.3 m | 2.8 m | 2.0 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Total assets | 1.1 bn | 1.0 bn | 913.9 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Accounts payable | 88.7 m | 138.9 m | 167.9 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Long-term debt | — | 22.1 m | 36.0 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Current liabilities | 212.8 m | 319.9 m | 350.1 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Equity | -89.7 m | -210.6 m | -260.0 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026verified |
| Shares outstanding at year end | 67.5 m | 129.0 m | 151.1 m | esef· 21 Oct 2026derived |
Cash flow · USD
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: 2 of at least 6
- score weight coverage: 14.6% of at least 60%
A scoring methodology on indicators and valuation, not investment advice.
Closing price
06 Nov 2026Source: olivLaw, closing series
Market cap: unavailable
Price and reporting are in different currencies; market indicators are unavailable.
Key indicators
Coverage and freshness
Score by group
15% · 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: 2.90 – 3.64 USD.
Valuation assumptions are editorial choices, not measured; beta is not measured.
Method ranges (USD per share)
— — Mid · ▏ Price
Valuation methods
- DCF (discounted cash flow)unavailable · input data missing
- Peers: EV/EBITDA2.90 – 3.64 (Mid 3.23)5 companies used · median multiple 9.0x · quartiles 8.1x – 10.1xAKVA.OL, ATEA.OL, B2I.OL, BONHR.OL, ELMRA.OL
- Peers: P/Eunavailable · the base of the ratio is not positive
- Dividend discount (DDM)unavailable · the company pays no dividend: a dividend model needs an explicit initiation assumption
Assumptions (illustrative, editorial)
- Risk-free rate
- 4.3%
- Equity risk premium
- 5.0%
- Beta (default)
- 1.00
- Cost of equity
- 9.3%
- Terminal growth
- 2.5%
Factor scorecard
Insufficient data
Minimum-evidence gate: indicators available: 2 of at least 6; score weight coverage: 14.6% of at least 60%
| Factor | Value | Score | Weight used |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROIC · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net margin · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| FCF conversion · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Revenue CAGR 3Y · Growth | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| EPS CAGR 3Y · Growth | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net debt / EBITDA · Balance sheet | 0.3x | 73 (vs peers) | 71% |
| Interest coverage · Balance sheet | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Current ratio · Balance sheet | 0.4x | 0 (on a fixed band) | 29% |
| P/E (TTM) · Valuation | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| EV/EBITDA · Valuation | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| FCF yield · Valuation | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Shareholder yield (distributions) · Returns | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Payout ratio (FCF) · Returns | unavailable | unavailable | — |
Factors without a value were dropped; the remaining weights were renormalised.
Score groups
- Balance sheet52/100 · 2/3 factors with a value
- Growth· partialunavailable · 0/2 factors with a value
- Quality· partialunavailable · 0/3 factors with a value
- Returns· partialunavailable · 0/2 factors with a value
- Valuation· partialunavailable · 0/3 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
Norse Atlantic ASA (NORSE.OL). Latest full fiscal year: 2025; data up to 2025-12-31.
Figures computed from the financial statements: net debt/EBITDA 0.3x.
The estimated value range is 2.90–3.64 USD per share (median of 1 methods, agreement: single method); assumptions are illustrative. The range is the median of the methods' low, central and high values, not a probability interval.
Insufficient data for a verdict (indicators available: 2 of at least 6; score weight coverage: 14.6% of at least 60%).
Text generated deterministically from the figures shown; no language model. Not investment advice.
What supports the thesis
- Net debt / EBITDA: 0.3x
What contradicts it
- Current ratio: 0.4x
Not assessed (insufficient data or a ratio without meaning): ROIC, Net margin, FCF conversion, Revenue CAGR 3Y, EPS CAGR 3Y, Interest coverage, P/E (TTM), EV/EBITDA, FCF yield, Shareholder yield (distributions), Payout ratio (FCF).
Versus the vertical median
Listed companies from Norway · same country · compared with 40 companies
Multiples and returns vs the median
Companies in the vertical
| Market cap | P/E | ROE | Net margin | Revenue YoY | 1A / 3A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AKER.OLAker Asa | 79.8 bn | 20.3 | 7.9% | 21.4% | +42.5% | +36% / +59% |
| AFG.OLAf Gruppen Asa | 21.5 bn | 19.8 | 39.7% | 3.4% | +4.4% | +8% / +69% |
| ELK.OLElkem Asa | 19.2 bn | 39.3 | 1.9% | 2.7% | −15.7% | +10% / +73% |
| ATEA.OLAtea Asa | 18.5 bn | 21.4 | 19.7% | 2.3% | +8.1% | +11% / +36% |
| AKSO.OLAker Solutions Asa | 17.4 bn | 6.8 | 22.5% | 4.1% | +19.2% | +18% / −12% |
| AUSS.OLAustevoll Seafood Asa | 16.6 bn | 37.1 | 1.6% | 1.1% | +11.1% | −7% / +10% |
| BRG.OLBorregaard Asa | 15.6 bn | 25.1 | 11.4% | 8.0% | +1.3% | −18% / −9% |
| BONHR.OLBonheur ASA | 11.2 bn | 7.8 | 17.1% | 11.4% | −10.8% | +17% / +44% |
| AFK.OLArendals Fossekompani Asa | 10.3 bn | — | -2.3% | -3.1% | −14.9% | +39% / +31% |
| B2I.OLB2 Impact Asa | 8.8 bn | 14.3 | 11.0% | 16.4% | +2.6% | +40% / +238% |
| AKVA.OLAkva Group Asa | 5.7 bn | 31.2 | 13.7% | 4.2% | +24.4% | +74% / +152% |
| ELMRA.OLElmera Group Asa | 5.1 bn | 32.0 | 10.5% | 1.3% | −0.9% | +32% / +98% |
| BOUV.OLBouvet Asa | 5.0 bn | 14.2 | 80.7% | 9.2% | −0.2% | −19% / −16% |
| CLOUD.OLCloudberry Clean Energy Asa | 4.0 bn | 61.9 | 1.3% | 13.1% | +34.0% | −5% / +29% |
| ABG.OLAbg Sundal Collier Holding Asa | 3.6 bn | 10.7 | 34.9% | 16.8% | +12.4% | −13% / +20% |
| ANDF.OLAndfjord Salmon Group As | 2.2 bn | — | -5.7% | -12,770.4% | +328.9% | −18% / −11% |
| BMA.OLByggma Asa | 1.6 bn | — | -25.3% | -11.9% | −2.5% | +61% / +15% |
| APR.OLAppear Asa | 1.4 bn | 10.5 | 30.1% | 16.1% | +32.3% | −53% / unavailable |
| AZT.OLArcticzymes Technologies Asa | 1.1 bn | 108.9 | 2.9% | 8.6% | +7.9% | −8% / −48% |
| CAPSL.OLCapsol Technologies Asa | 884.6 m | — | -89.4% | -114.8% | −25.0% | −33% / −66% |
| BOR.OLBorgestad Asa | 553.2 m | 36.1 | 2.1% | 1.4% | −3.0% | −7% / +41% |
| ARR.OLArribatec Group Asa | 234.6 m | 4.8 | 22.1% | 9.3% | +15.7% | −33% / −55% |
| DELIA.OLDellia Group Asa | 73.5 m | 1.5 | 22.6% | 7.7% | +140.0% | −62% / unavailable |
| ABTEC.OLAqua Bio Technology Asa | 11.1 m | 0.1 | — | 7,297.7% | −87.2% | −82% / −97% |
| AGLX.OLAgilyx Asa | — | — | -182.4% | -12,189.3% | +20.3% | −40% / −41% |
1- and 3-year price returns: for NORSE.OL 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
Scenarios are not available. input data missing
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
Norse Atlantic ASA operates Boeing 787 aircraft on its own scheduled routes and on long-term ACMI contracts, a mix that could stabilise its revenue. It is now pursuing a rights issue and a bridge loan amid volatile jet fuel prices, and the going concern assumption remains subject to uncertainty.
SWOT
Strengths
- A uniform fleet of Boeing 787 aircraft offers fuel efficiency and a relatively good position in the context of carbon costs.
- Long-term ACMI contracts secure fixed revenue and reduce exposure to jet fuel prices.
- Pre-sales for the company's own routes are, according to the report, stronger than in the previous year.
Weaknesses
- The company has no hedging against jet fuel prices, which leaves results exposed to price shocks.
- There are overdue tax liabilities to US authorities that require a downpayment plan.
- Dependence on liquidity and on credit card acquirer hold-back terms can limit cash flows.
Opportunities
- Extending the ACMI model to other customers could stabilise fleet utilisation throughout the year.
- Moving to sustainable aviation fuels could reduce direct emission costs in the future.
- Focusing the own network on the most profitable routes could improve margins.
Threats
- Rising jet fuel prices and geopolitical volatility can directly affect the company's results.
- Aggressive competitor fares on shared routes can reduce revenue and market share.
- If the going concern assumption does not hold, some assets could be carried at lower values.
Risks
- Going concernhigh
The Board considers the going concern assumption present, but the matter remains subject to uncertainty given geopolitical risk and fuel price volatility.
- Jet fuel priceshigh
The company has no hedging against jet fuel, and sudden increases can affect the profitability of its own routes.
- Overdue tax liabilitiesmedium
Overdue liabilities to US tax authorities require a downpayment plan whose completion is not yet confirmed.
- Liquidity and card hold-backsmedium
Higher amounts held back by card companies or longer hold-back periods could affect cash flow.
- Currency risklow
Part of the cash is held in foreign currencies and revenues and costs are spread across several currencies, creating exposure to exchange rates.
Investment thesis
What would need to be true (bull case)
- If the ACMI contracts produce fixed revenue throughout the year, the company could substantially reduce its seasonal vulnerability.
- Pre-sales on own routes show a positive trend, which could support revenue if the winter season is favourable.
- If the rights issue and bridge loan are completed, the company could have the liquidity needed until the market normalises.
What would break the thesis
- If jet fuel prices remain high, the profitability of own routes could stay under pressure.
- If the rights issue is not completed on the announced terms, liquidity needs could become urgent.
- If competitor fares remain aggressive, the company could struggle to build its customer base.
What to watch
- Completion of the rights issue and use of the bridge loan2026
- Development of jet fuel prices and impact on own routesQ1 2027
- Status of the downpayment plan with US tax authorities2027
- Commercial performance of the winter season on own routesnext 10-K
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
Norse Atlantic ASA is a Norwegian airline that mainly operates uniform Boeing 787-9 aircraft. According to the 2025 annual report, the company has allocated a significant portion of its capacity to long-term ACMI services, while its own network is limited to the most profitable routes. This reorientation aims at year-round fixed revenue and a de-risking of the business model.
At year-end 2025 the fleet included 12 Boeing 787-9 aircraft, six of which were to operate for IndiGo from 2026 under long-term ACMI charters. The company stated that the fixed revenue and cash flows from these contracts reduce fuel price exposure, since the fuel cost is borne by the customer.
Besides the ACMI model, Norse maintains its own scheduled routes, and pre-sales on routes out for sale were, according to the report, well above the level of the same period the previous year. The company also noted overdue passenger tax payments to the US IRS, for which it has started a downpayment plan.
Segments
Long-term ACMI
ACMI services, where the aircraft, crew and maintenance are provided to another operator, are the declared strategic priority for 2026. The company describes them as a source of fixed revenue throughout the year, with about six aircraft already tied to the IndiGo contract.
Own scheduled network
Flights on the own network remain a smaller component of capacity, concentrated on routes considered the most profitable. Their commercial performance, expressed through load factors and fares, is the main uncertainty factor the report points to.
Cargo and other revenue
Cargo and aircraft lease revenues are, according to the report, denominated entirely in USD. The report does not break down separately the contribution of these lines to total results.
Market context
The airline industry is highly competitive, and new companies face a maturity period for routes and markets. The annual report notes that geopolitical shocks and the sharp rise in jet fuel prices affect the whole sector, not only Norse.
Demand for air travel is seasonal and can be affected by high inflation, which could reduce consumer spending. The company notes that airline fares and passenger demand have fluctuated significantly in the past and may continue to fluctuate.
Trends
- Shift towards ACMItailwind
The move to long-term ACMI contracts provides fixed revenue and reduces dependence on seasonal demand, as the model is anchored in signed contracts.
- Jet fuel price volatilityheadwind
Higher jet fuel prices, aggravated by Middle East conflicts, could weigh on the profitability of own routes, since the company has no hedging in place.
- Passenger demand and faresmixed
Pre-sales on routes out for sale are, according to the report, above the prior year level, which could support revenue if the trend holds into the winter season.
- Cost of carbon emissionsmixed
Rising emission costs could increase operating costs, but the fuel efficiency of the Boeing 787 could give the company a better relative position against older fleets.
Competitive position
The annual report indicates that the airline market is very competitive, and competitors may apply aggressive pricing on routes operated by Norse. This could make it harder to establish a customer base for a company still in its maturity period.
In ACMI contracts, competition is mainly on aircraft availability, cost and operational reliability, and the report does not explicitly name competitors. The list below is therefore based only on the categories of operators mentioned in the source.
- Other ACMI operators
Companies offering aircraft with crew for long-term charter, in the same segment as Norse ACMI contracts; the report does not name them.
- Low-cost carriers on transatlantic routes
Operators competing for the same passenger routes, where the report mentions aggressive competitor fares.
- Traditional airlines
Operators with larger networks that can use their scale to compete on the company's own routes.
- Aircraft lessors
Suppliers of aircraft and financing with which the company has deposits and leasing contracts; not direct competitors, but they influence fleet costs.
News & filings
In the press
- Norse Atlantic lands lease deal with Pakistan's PIACNA (Channel NewsAsia) · 09 Oct 2026 · EN
- Will Norse Atlantic's Cheap Transatlantic Flights Soon Disappear?Simple Flying · 25 Sept 2026 · EN
Annual reports (ESEF)
- Annual report 202521 Oct 2026
- Annual report 202408 May 2025
Sources
- [1] Annual report, fiscal year ended 2025-12-31 (ESEF) · SEC / Norse Atlantic ASA · 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.