Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
BE logo unavailable

BE Research brief

Bloom Energy

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$203.17(−8.61%)

Sagehood’s view on BE

Bloom Energy · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

38Bearish50 is balancedScore unchanged since 2026-10-29 at 38; view unchanged at Bearish. Compare the two recordsConfidence 45 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

Dated research brief

WhyBloom Energy's bearish case is driven by valuation, since the $46.60 base fair value sits 77% below the $203.17 close. The unresolved risk is that 112.2% revenue growth and a 14.9% operating margin keep the multiple supported.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the bearish view is the revenue inflection.
Break conditionFrom the valuation specialist: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month FCF margin below the 7.5% grid column would break the base case, since the grid's lowest margin column already caps the read.Tests that specialist’s reading, not this page’s whole Bearish view.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

Close vs. model fair value · discounted cash flow

Bear
$5.80
Base
$46.60
Bull
$61.20

Base case −77% vs. the 2026-10-30 close, on fundamentals to 2026-09-30. Estimates from this research’s valuation model, not a price target.

The peer-multiple estimate is not shown: the close is 5.8 times the estimate.

The bear case sits more than 5× from the close: an extreme scenario, shown as the model computed it.

The market price implies more growth or higher margins than this model assumes, so its base case sits far below the close. The valuation specialist weighs that gap; it is not a forecast that the price will fall.

Against peers

Industrials
MultipleBEGroup medianPercentile
P/E (TTM)123.13×18.57×100th
P/S17.04×4.38×100th
P/B33.61×5.84×100th
FCF yield0.67%3.81%25th
Score details & research limitations9 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

Where the break condition comes from: Sagehood research took this condition from the valuation specialist. It tests that specialist’s own reading, so it does not say everything that would change this page’s Bearish view.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$203.17 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day−8.61%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage8 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 2 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 8 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run38 on 2026-10-29 → 38 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Filing cited in the evidenceNot recorded on this card. The newest filing on record is under Key financials, and recent filings are listed under SEC filings.
Peer set4 names in Industrials: BA, CPRT, CSX, UBER. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range says why the peer-multiple estimate is not shown.

Not in this run: Company profile date and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

9 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $203.17

−34.3% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

BE adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. BE adjusted close. Continuous series. $203.17 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-09-23 to 2026-10-30 · 19 publications

Each point is a verified published score. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3038Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2938Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2850Neutral49Current method
2026-10-2744Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2644Bearish49Current method
2026-10-2342Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2240Bearish50Current method
2026-10-2150Neutral30Current method
2026-10-1645Neutral45Current method
2026-10-0950Neutral40Current method
2026-10-0750Neutral48Current method
2026-10-0252Neutral49Current method
2026-10-0154Neutral55Current method
2026-09-3054Neutral55Current method
2026-09-2958Neutral55Current method
2026-09-2855Neutral60Current method
2026-09-2550Neutral48Current method
2026-09-24 · retrospective50Neutral55Current method
2026-09-2350Neutral55Current method

Specialists

8 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

2 unavailable

BE research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Bullish

Bloom Energy's revenue is inflecting sharply: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $3,811 million grew 112.2% year over year, far above the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median, with quarterly growth accelerating from 36.3% to 139.8% and operating margin expanding 9.9 percentage points to 14.9%.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $3,811 million grew 112.2% year over year against the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median, quarterly revenue growth accelerated from 36.3% to 139.8%, operating margin reached 14.9% versus the 14.9% sector operating-margin median, and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $437 million with net debt to EBITDA of −0.02.

Why it matters now

Accelerating revenue and expanding operating margin indicate the fuel-cell business is scaling into profitability, while the 38.9% share-count increase dilutes per-share economics and the 0.84 free-cash-flow conversion sits just below the 0.85 sector free-cash-flow-conversion median.

What could change the view

Countercase: The read would be wrong if the revenue surge reflects a few large orders that do not repeat, and the 38.9% share growth means per-share value creation lags the headline revenue expansion. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
66
Evidence confidence
70
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
9.10
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.19
Weighted contribution
12.55
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Bullish

Score
66
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.19
Weighted contribution
12.55

Risk specialist

Bearish

Score
22
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.10
Weighted contribution
2.28

Sector specialist

Neutral

Score
45
Evidence confidence
45
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.23

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.03
Weighted contribution
1.72

News specialist

Neutral

Score
55
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
6.95

Price-trend specialist

Bearish

Score
35
Evidence confidence
50
Weight in the score
0.21
Weighted contribution
7.31

Valuation specialist

Bearish

Score
22
Evidence confidence
45
Weight in the score
0.15
Weighted contribution
3.31

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.60

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

BE: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

38

Bearish50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Valuation specialist

Bearish

Specialist score 22Evidence confidence 45
What the specialist sees

Base fair value of $46.60 is 77% below the $203.17 close, and even the bull case at $61.20 leaves a 70% downside. Trailing-twelve-month revenue growth of 112.2% and a 14.9% EBIT margin are strong, but the peer-implied median of $35.31 is 82.6% below the close, so comps contradict.

This view cites the peer-multiple estimate, which this page does not show. See Valuation range.
Why it matters

With a 15.83% WACC and a 38.9% year-over-year share increase, the grid's best growth row still leaves the price far above fair value, so the multiple has to compress unless margins exceed the 19.5% top column.

What argues against it

The read would be wrong if Bloom Energy's FCF margin expands past the grid's 19.5% top column and revenue growth holds above 45%, which the grid does not model.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month FCF margin below the 7.5% grid column would break the base case, since the grid's lowest margin column already caps the read.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 42.96. Sagehood research’s adjustment was −4.96. 38 on 2026-10-29 → 38 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Valuation specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Financial specialist

    Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $3,811 million grew 112.2% year over year against the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median, quarterly revenue growth accelerated from 36.3% to 139.8%, operating margin reached 14.9% versus the 14.9% sector operating-margin median, and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $437 million with net debt to EBITDA of −0.02.

  3. Risk specialist

    BE shows twenty-day annualized volatility 88.4% against sixty-day annualized volatility 86.1% with volatility trend stable, drawdown from the one-year high −41.3% versus maximum one-year drawdown −52.7%, one-year large daily-move count 133, downside beta 5.17 against SPY beta 4.48, and worst five-day return over one year −26.4%.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

A later reading showing TTM FCF margin below the 7.5% grid column would break the base case, since the grid's lowest margin column already caps the read.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

BE: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Research evidence at a glance

Accepted specialist evidence · no score adjustment

Key figures

Fundamentals

Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $3,811 million grew 112.2% year over year against the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median, quarterly revenue growth accelerated from 36.3% to 139.8%, operating margin reached 14.9% versus the 14.9% sector operating-margin median, and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $437 million with net debt to EBITDA of −0.02.

Valuation model

The base case pairs 45% revenue growth with an 11.5% FCF margin for a $46.60 fair value, 77% under the $203.17 close, while the bull case at 45% growth and a 15.5% margin reaches $61.20, still 70% below it.

Potential upside

  • Bloom Energy's revenue is inflecting sharply: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $3,811 million grew 112.2% year over year, far above the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median, with quarterly growth accelerating from 36.3% to 139.8% and operating margin expanding 9.9 percentage points to 14.9%.

Potential downside

  • Base fair value of $46.60 is 77% below the $203.17 close, and even the bull case at $61.20 leaves a 70% downside. Trailing-twelve-month revenue growth of 112.2% and a 14.9% EBIT margin are strong, but the peer-implied median of $35.31 is 82.6% below the close, so comps contradict.

This analysis cites the peer-multiple estimate, which this page does not show. See Valuation range.

Questions to watch

  • A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 16.7% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth claim.

  • A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month FCF margin below the 7.5% grid column would break the base case, since the grid's lowest margin column already caps the read.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Valuation the research computed

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $203.17 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-09-30.

Fair value by discounted cash flow, at the cells this run nominated.

Bear
$5.80−97% vs close
Base
$46.60−77% vs close
Bull
$61.20−70% vs close

The bear case sits more than 5× from the close: an extreme scenario, shown as the model computed it.

The peer-multiple estimate is not shown: the close is 5.8 times the estimate.

Peers: the 4 Liquid 100 names in Industrials that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: BA, CPRT, CSX, UBER.

Multiples against the peer group

Industrials · 4 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)123.13×

    Peer median 18.57× · middle half 16.85× to 21.35× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Price to sales17.04×

    Peer median 4.38× · middle half 2.19× to 6.35× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Price to book33.61×

    Peer median 5.84× · middle half 4.52× to 10.21× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield0.67%

    Peer median 3.81% · middle half 2.49% to 5.09% · 25th percentile of the group

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: 12 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; stock-based compensation is not among this research’s inputs; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

Bloom Energy (BE) research | Sagehood