Stock Analysis 2021-2026: The Target Price That Never Arrives

From Microsoft to Pernod Ricard: Six Years of Analysis Without a Target Price

First it was CaixaBank. Then came BBVA, Ercros, Inditex, Disney, Grifols, Iberdrola, and a long list that, five years later, leads to Rubis, Adobe, Pinduoduo, or Ulta Beauty. Between 2021 and 2026, a Spanish stock analysis website has been publishing quarterly earnings reports, stock by stock, with a peculiarity that is baffling at first glance: it is called Precio Objetivo (Target Price) and has never given a target price.

The answer, early on, was explicit: the firm doesn't like setting an exact figure. It argues that a fixed number depends on too many factors and market speculation, and ultimately frustrates the investor when the price isn't reached. This is a defensible stance for a private analyst. On a website that advertises itself with that name, it is, to say the least, a paradox that has held for almost six years.

Why Does an Analysis Website Refuse to Give a Target Price?

Because, according to its own criteria, the exact target price is speculation, not analysis. The firm made it clear when someone asked in writing: it prefers ranges, scenarios, and context over a big number in large print. The practical consequence is that the reader never knows if a stock is expensive or cheap relative to the analyst's estimate; they only get the technical analysis, fundamentals, and, above all, the results.

That gap—the figure that never appears—is what has fueled much of the criticism. Some argue that a website called Precio Objetivo that refuses to publish target prices is a foolproof plan. The author has not wavered: he maintains the formula and continues to publish reports, updates, and portfolios without clearing up the doubt.

Six Years of Results, Quarter by Quarter

Here lies the real substance of the work. The tracking began in 2021 with the big tech companies: Facebook closed the third quarter of 2021 with revenues of 29,010 million, 35.11% more than a year earlier, and Microsoft posted 45,317 million in revenue and a profit of 20,505 million, up 47.59%. Numbers from another era, when cheap money still flowed freely.

Over the years, the focus broadens. Names from the continuous Spanish market pass through the analysis—CaixaBank, BBVA, Sabadell, Santander, Telefónica, Repsol, Iberdrola, Cellnex, Grifols, Meliá, Atresmedia, Faes Farma, Ercros, Grupo San José, Alantra, Vidrala—and a growing list of international companies: Puma, Legrand, Kering, LVMH, Pernod Ricard, Roche, CBRE, Adobe, Ulta Beauty, Pinduoduo, Rubis.

Each quarter, the same ritual: revenue, operating income, and net profit compared to the same period of the previous year, with a green checkmark or a red cross next to it. Alantra, in the second quarter of 2024, improved its financial performance but saw a 22.2% drop in revenue and an EBIT of -3.9 million. Vidrala's revenue fell 1.42% and profit 2.73%. Legrand's sales grew (+1.72%) but profit was cut by 5.84%.

The Figures That Added Up: Rubis, CBRE, and Adobe

Not everything is disappointment. In the first half of 2026, Rubis's revenue soared 24.16% and its net profit rose 17.11%. CBRE, in the third quarter of 2025, increased revenue by 13.52% and profit by 61.33%, including an upward revision of forecasts. Adobe, in its third quarter of 2026, continued to grow in double digits and exceeded expectations. Ulta Beauty met expectations on all three metrics and improved its guidance.

The recurring pattern in the analyses: when a company exceeds expectations, the valuation is slightly raised; when it meets them, it remains the same. The tone is more that of a manager than a snake-oil salesman, although the website's name might suggest otherwise.

The Ones That Are Bleeding: Puma, Kering, LVMH, and Pernod Ricard

The other side of the coin is luxury and discretionary consumption, and there the numbers sting. Puma closed the second quarter of 2024 with flat revenue (-0.19%) and a net profit 23.82% lower. Kering saw its revenue fall 9.76% in the third quarter of 2025. LVMH dropped 5.86% in the first quarter of 2026. And Pernod Ricard recorded a 50% plunge in its net profit in the second half of 2026, after a third quarter with revenue 14.47% lower.

The analyst's interpretation in almost all cases is the same: the company is holding up "in an adverse situation." This is a nuance that separates analysis from propaganda, but also a catch-all phrase that appears too often. A company doesn't fall 50% because the environment is difficult; it falls, moreover, because something structural is wrong.

Errata, 2021 Data, and Accusations of Driving Traffic

No six-year tracking exercise emerges unscathed from external review. In 2023, one of the harshest criticisms pointed to formal and substantive errors: typos in texts and conclusions with 2020-21 data in reports presented as updated. The response defended that some of those figures were contextual references—patents expiring that year—but admitted they would be reviewed.

There was a more uncomfortable front. Several voices pointed out that the space functioned as a vehicle to drive traffic to the website, with a link to each new analysis, and recalled that maintaining a community for years has costs. The discussion led to the classic suspicion: first useful content, then the link. The analyst never hid that the website was his; the reproach was about the format, not the intention.

The Macro Thesis Underlying the Entire Tracking

Beneath each report lies an idea about the cycle. There is a current of thought that holds that stock markets have been moving in a narrow range for months—and possibly years—without real growth beyond dividends, and that the liquidity printing that sustained the market since 2008 has stopped accelerating. The central argument: with inflation at 5%, growth stagnates, and the only reliable return is distributed profits.

The counterargument from the other side is that inflation alone does not stop growth; what stops it is the rise in interest rates to contain it. And that solid companies continue to grow regardless of macroeconomic noise. Hence the confessed preference for low-growth, low-multiple stocks capable of holding up when money ceases to be free.

Atresmedia, the Fetish Stock of Discord

If there is one name that concentrates disagreement, it is Atresmedia. The company has appeared in the tracking year after year, defended as a low-multiple, generous dividend stock, and at the same time pointed to as an example of a bad investment: one of the most repeated criticisms recalled an accumulated drop of -82.17% in five years. The analyst responded with the latest results, which were weak, with fewer subscribers to its platform and a bleak future for conventional television.

That intersection—cheap stock with a shrinking business—summarizes the underlying problem. A low P/E ratio can be an opportunity or a trap. It depends on whether the business hits bottom or continues to fall. And here, six years later, no one has closed the question.

The tracking extends to 2026 with the same mechanics with which it began: quarterly analyses, updated portfolios, a green checkmark or a red cross, and the target price figure that still hasn't appeared. The website has done its part: hundreds of reports, almost no easy headlines. The only thing the reader cannot calculate is at what price to buy. And perhaps therein lies the answer as to why they never state it.