Skip to main content
Preview

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

Radar
SKYD logo unavailable

SKYD Research brief

Skydance Corporation

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$7.95(+0.63%)

Sagehood’s view on SKYD

Skydance Corporation · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

40Bearish50 is balancedScore change +2 since 2026-10-29, from 38 to 40; 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

WhySkydance reads bearish because net debt to EBITDA of 6,432.0 dwarfs the 1.72 sector median while revenue grew just 2.2% and 0.9%. The unresolved risk is the 0.76 P/B against a 3.42 peer median, a discount that could close.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case for the company is the book-value discount, which could close sharply. The 0.76 P/B sits against a 3.42 peer median and the single peer-implied price of $36.01 is 352.9% above the $7.95 close, though that rests on 1 implied price.This view cites the peer-multiple estimate, which this page does not show. See Valuation & peers.
Break conditionFrom the financial specialist: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.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

No model fair value for this run

No fair-value range was computed for this run: the cash-flow valuation grid was unavailable because free cash flow or share data was missing.

Against peers

Communication Services
MultipleSKYDGroup medianPercentile
P/B0.76×3.42×0th
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 financial 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$7.95 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day+0.63%
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 → 40 on 2026-10-30 (+2 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 set8 names in Communication Services: CMCSA, DIS, GOOG, GOOGL, META, NFLX, T, VZ. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. “Valuation & peers” 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 $7.95

−15.3% from 2026-06-25

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

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

Selected 2026-10-30. SKYD adjusted close. Continuous series. $7.95 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

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

Each point is a verified published score.

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3040Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2938Bearish40Current method
2026-10-2838Bearish45Current method
2026-10-2738Bearish30Current method
2026-10-2638Bearish35Current method
2026-10-2339Bearish55Current method
2026-10-2233Bearish42Current method
2026-10-2138Bearish50Current method
2026-10-1624Bearish60Current method
2026-10-0950Neutral30Current 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

SKYD research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Neutral

Skydance's coverage is partial: trailing-twelve-month revenue, cash flow and margins are unavailable, and the latest two quarters show revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: The latest two quarters showed revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%, and net debt to EBITDA was 6,432.0 versus the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median, with total debt of $14,491 million and cash of $1,627 million. Trailing-twelve-month revenue, operating cash flow and free cash flow are not available.

Why it matters now

A net-debt-to-EBITDA ratio far above the sector median indicates the balance sheet is heavily levered relative to earnings, and the low single-digit revenue growth offers little capacity to deleverage, though the missing trailing twelve months figures prevent a full cash-flow assessment.

What could change the view

Countercase: If the net-debt-to-EBITDA figure reflects a transitional accounting basis after a merger rather than steady-state leverage, the distress read is wrong; the missing trailing-twelve-month revenue and cash-flow data leave the earnings base unverified. Falsifier: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
45
Evidence confidence
25
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
3.25
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.08
Weighted contribution
3.58
Business driver
The latest two quarters showed revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%, and net debt to EBITDA was 6,432.0 versus the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median, with total debt of $14,491 million and cash of $1,627 million. Trailing-twelve-month revenue, operating cash flow and free cash flow are not available.
Mechanism
A net-debt-to-EBITDA ratio far above the sector median indicates the balance sheet is heavily levered relative to earnings, and the low single-digit revenue growth offers little capacity to deleverage, though the missing trailing twelve months figures prevent a full cash-flow assessment.
Countercase
If the net-debt-to-EBITDA figure reflects a transitional accounting basis after a merger rather than steady-state leverage, the distress read is wrong; the missing trailing-twelve-month revenue and cash-flow data leave the earnings base unverified.
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

Neutral

Score
45
Evidence confidence
25
Weight in the score
0.08
Weighted contribution
3.58

Risk specialist

Bearish

Score
22
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
2.37

Sector specialist

Bearish

Score
34
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
4.57

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.04
Weighted contribution
2.02

News specialist

Neutral

Score
55
Evidence confidence
50
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
7.40

Price-trend specialist

Bearish

Score
30
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.27
Weighted contribution
8.07

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
30
Weight in the score
0.12
Weighted contribution
5.87

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
52
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.12
Weighted contribution
6.10

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

SKYD: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

40

Bearish50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Financial specialist

Neutral

Specialist score 45Evidence confidence 25
What the specialist sees

The latest two quarters showed revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%, and net debt to EBITDA was 6,432.0 versus the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median, with total debt of $14,491 million and cash of $1,627 million. Trailing-twelve-month revenue, operating cash flow and free cash flow are not available.

Why it matters

A net-debt-to-EBITDA ratio far above the sector median indicates the balance sheet is heavily levered relative to earnings, and the low single-digit revenue growth offers little capacity to deleverage, though the missing trailing twelve months figures prevent a full cash-flow assessment.

What argues against it

If the net-debt-to-EBITDA figure reflects a transitional accounting basis after a merger rather than steady-state leverage, the distress read is wrong; the missing trailing-twelve-month revenue and cash-flow data leave the earnings base unverified.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 39.97. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +0.03. 38 on 2026-10-29 → 40 on 2026-10-30 (+2 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. Financial specialist

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

  2. Risk specialist

    Skydance shows annualized 20-day volatility of 103.1% against 60-day volatility of 70.2%, a drawdown now of −51.6% versus a 1-year maximum of −58.6%, downside beta of 1.95 versus beta to SPY of 0.74, 36 large-move days over the last year, and earnings 10 days away.

  3. Price-trend specialist

    Close 7.95 sits 20.5% below 200-day average and 16.4% below 50-day average with a death cross 194 days old; 14-day RSI 43.5, 14-week RSI 39.5, ADX 27.5 with negative directional indicator 25.9 over positive directional indicator 18.4, and the 1-year channel slopes −38.8% annualized.

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 net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

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

SKYD: 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

The latest two quarters showed revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%, and net debt to EBITDA was 6,432.0 versus the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median, with total debt of $14,491 million and cash of $1,627 million. Trailing-twelve-month revenue, operating cash flow and free cash flow are not available.

Valuation model

Skydance trades at a 0.76 P/B against the 3.42 Communication Services peer median, and the single peer-implied price of $36.01 is 352.9% above the $7.95 close, but the peer-implied median rests on 1 implied price and the trailing-twelve-month revenue and EPS figures are not available.

See the note under What argues against this view at the top of this page.

Potential upside

  • Skydance has no valuation grid, so the read rests on the 0.76 P/B against the 3.42 Communication Services peer median and the single peer-implied price of $36.01, which is 352.9% above the $7.95 close but rests on 1 implied price.

See the note under What argues against this view at the top of this page.

Potential downside

  • Skydance's coverage is partial: trailing-twelve-month revenue, cash flow and margins are unavailable, and the latest two quarters show revenue growth of 2.2% and 0.9%.

Questions to watch

  • A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.72 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

  • A later reading showing a P/B above the 3.42 Communication Services peer median, or a trailing-twelve-month EBIT margin above the −9.8% five-year average, would break the cheap-verdict claim.

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 $7.95 (recorded)

No fair-value range this session: the cash-flow valuation grid was unavailable because free cash flow or share data was missing

The peer-multiple estimate is not shown: it rests on a single peer-median multiple (price to book), and one multiple is not a median, and it is 4.5 times the close.

Peers: the 8 Liquid 100 names in Communication Services that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: CMCSA, DIS, GOOG, GOOGL, META, NFLX, T, VZ.

Multiples against the peer group

Communication Services · 8 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)Not computed in this research

    Peer median 14.57× · middle half 11.48× to 18.70×

  • Price to salesNot computed in this research

    Peer median 3.69× · middle half 1.31× to 6.71×

  • Price to book0.76×

    Peer median 3.42× · middle half 1.63× to 5.23× · 0th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yieldNot computed in this research

    Peer median 4.17% · middle half 1.2% to 8.05%

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

Evidence limits: Filed financials were incomplete for this name on this session; 6 valuation inputs required conservative handling: no full-year gross-profit line was filed; no full-year shares-outstanding figure was filed; stock-based compensation is not among this research’s inputs; tax expense 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; the cash-flow valuation grid was unavailable because free cash flow or share data was missing.

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.

Skydance Corporation (SKYD) research | Sagehood