Hum, c’est une bonne question,
Pour quelles raisons tu en es sorti ?
C’est quasiment la première action que j’ai acheté, et je n’avais pas assez fait attention à la valorisation.
2130€ m’a finalement semblé élevé, et dès que le cours est remonté au-dessus j’ai récupéré ma mise, en espérant une nouvelle baisse sous les 2k€…
Un cours inférieur à 2000€ en 2025 impliquerait un PER < 45x, ce qui reste un niveau rarement atteint pour Hermès sur les cinq dernières années. Historiquement, nous avons vu un PER < 45x de façon prolongée uniquement en mars-avril 2020 et mi-2022, des périodes où de nombreuses entreprises de qualité étaient massivement sous-évaluées, donc avec beaucoup d’opportunités sur de multiples secteur pour y déployer son cash.
Concernant 2130€, ce prix correspondait probablement au PER moyen des cinq dernières années, voire légèrement en dessous. Pas si excessif, donc, si l’on se base sur l’historique de valorisation.
Sur des entreprises exceptionnelles, à la qualité éprouvée et à la résilience avérée, vendre uniquement sur des critères de valorisation n’est pas forcément une bonne approche. D’ailleurs, de nombreux investisseurs long terme de renom s’accordent sur ce point.
Si ça peut t’aider dans tes futures décisions, voici le cadre personnel que j’emploi pour me décider sur une vente de position (je te partage cela car je crois comprendre que tu investi également pour le long terme) :
- Vente si l’entreprise ne répond plus à mes critères de qualité initiale, attendre la publication des résultats officiels en cas de doute.
- Vente si une opportunité bien plus attractive se présente, avec une logique évidente à long terme
- Vente si je réalise d’une erreur dans ma thèse d’investissement initiale
Toujours essayer d’aborder l’achat ou la vente d’une position de qualité avec une approche rationnelle plutôt qu’émotionnelle. Plus facile à dire qu’à faire, je le sais bien, mais c’est la clé : Ne pas se précipiter.
Hermès n’a fondamentalement pas changer, le business est exceptionnel, et probablement l’une des plus belles entreprises européenne à ce jour.
1 « J'aime »
Salut Kevin,
Merci pour ta réponse (et désolé pour la mienne bien tardive) !
Hermès a bien été sous les 2k€ durant quasiment tout septembre 2024, et s’en est à nouveau rapproché en décembre.
Merci pour ce cadre, auquel j’adhère complètement. Je suis en train de formaliser un canva perso pour éviter de succomber à l’émotionnel justement, cela va m’inspirer.
Etant donné que j’investi sur le long terme en effet, je pense que le prix auquel j’achète est aussi très important. Si on rajoute ce critère, je pense que j’avais investi à un cours un peu trop élevé, et comme Hermès représentait alors plus de 10% de mon portefeuille je me suis dit qu’il fallait mieux en sortir avec une toute petit PV plutôt qu’avoir des regrets.
Bonne journée
1 « J'aime »
Bonjour à tous,
Voici mon update de février (avec du retard), ainsi que mes réflexions en cours.
Evidemment il s’est passé beaucoup de chose depuis le début du mois, mais je partagerai le détail lors de mon prochain récap 
PEA
- DCA sur S&P500, ainsi que Investor AB. Compte tenu du fait qu’il s’agit en réalité quasiment d’un « ETF Nordics », je pense que ça n’est pas une mauvaise approche pour le long terme.
- Renforcement de Veolia et Iberdrola, qui ont tous les deux présenté de très bon résultats, et un dividende en hausse !
- Renfort enfin de TotalEnergies, toujours sous-évalué à mon sens
- Ouverture d’une (petite) ligne Novo Nordisk !
Comme indiqué ci-dessous, je suis sorti de UNH. Je souhaite toujours avoir 2 positions sur chaque secteur, j’ai donc cherché un remplaçant. J’ai beaucoup lu sur Novo Nordisk pour me faire un avis (notamment cet article https://www.investseekers.com/post/novo-nordisk-a-global-leader-in-obesity-and-diabetes-therapies), et fait tourner le module DCF de Stock Unlock avec des hypothèses pessimistes, je pense qu’à la valorisation actuelle c’est un bon point d’entrée pour le très long terme.
Les lignes « dividendes » et/ou « défensives » de mon PEA commencent à prendre une place importante dans mon portefeuille, je vais ralentir le rythme dans les prochains mois.
CTO
- Renforcement de Google et Amazon, qui me semblaient correctement valorisés.
- J’ai soldé ma ligne UNH, avec une petite plus-value, inspiré par de nombreux échanges sur ce forum et ailleurs.
Ma réflexion du moment concernant mon ETF World Healthcare, qui représente un pourcentage élevé de mon portefeuille. Il a pour objectif de le stabiliser et baisser sa volatilité (fonction défensive) et de me permettre de bénéficier de la tendance très long terme sur ce secteur (vieillissement, émergence des classes moyennes dans les pays émergents…). Je me demande malgré tout si je ne ferais pas mieux de chercher une action prévisible dans cette industrie (type Clinica Baviera, que je suis en train d’analyser en détail pour le PEA de ma femme).
Pour le reste en ce moment mon objectif est d’être discipliné et d’éviter le FOMO (pas facile 
). J’ai défini des points d’entrée pour tous mes titres vifs, fait un DCA sur ETF, et attend tranquillement.
Comme toujours, je suis toujours ravi de lire vos commentaires !
Bonne journée !
1 « J'aime »
Petit oubli de ma part, je vous partage la recherche approfondie effectuée par ChatGPT sur Novo Nordisk, avec comme seul input la dernière présentation des résultats.
Honnêtement je trouve ça absolument impressionant, je vais faire tourner la moulinette avec plus d’inputs, et faire de même sur d’autres positions.
Novo Nordisk Long-Term Investment Analysis (20+ Year Horizon)
1. Company Fundamentals
Revenue & Profit Growth: Novo Nordisk has delivered robust growth in recent years. Annual sales jumped from DKK 232.3 billion in 2023 to DKK 290.4 billion in 2024 – a 25% increase (26% at constant exchange rates). Net profit climbed 21% in 2024 to DKK 100.99 billion, continuing a strong upward trend driven by the booming demand for its diabetes and obesity medications. Notably, Novo’s operating profit margin held steady at a high ~44% in 2024 (matching 2023), with gross margins near 85%, indicating effective cost control even as it scales. This high profitability reflects the pricing power and efficiency of its core products (like Ozempic and Wegovy) and provides a cushion for future investments.
Cash Flows & Capital Allocation: Novo Nordisk typically converts a large share of earnings to free cash flow, though 2024 was an exception due to heavy strategic investment. Free cash flow was –DKK 14.7 billion in 2024, as the company spent heavily on expanding production capacity (including a major Catalent manufacturing site acquisition). This one-time outflow did not signal distress – Novo actually returned DKK 64.3 billion to shareholders in 2024 via dividends and buybacks, supported by prior cash reserves and financing. Looking ahead, free cash flow is set to rebound strongly; management projects DKK 75–85 billion FCF in 2025 as new capacity comes online
. Novo has a shareholder-friendly capital policy, exemplified by a 29-year streak of rising dividends, including a 21% hike to DKK 11.40/share for 2024. Such consistent returns underscore confidence in its cash-generation ability over the long term.
Balance Sheet Strength: The company’s financial health appears solid. Novo Nordisk carried modest debt relative to its size – in 2024 it issued €4.65 billion in bonds, bringing total outstanding Eurobonds to €6.8 billion (≈DKK 50 billion)
. This debt load is small next to its equity (DKK ~143.5 billion) and annual profits, yielding a manageable debt-to-equity ratio (~67%)
. Interest costs remain low (net financial expense was only DKK 1.15 billion in 2024). Overall, Novo’s financial position is healthy – strong growth, high margins, and prudent leverage – providing a foundation to invest in R&D and withstand industry cycles over the next 20+ years.
2. Market Position
Competitive Advantages: Novo Nordisk is the clear leader in its core markets. It holds roughly one-third of the entire global diabetes care market by value (about 33.7% share)
, thanks to its portfolio of insulins and GLP-1 therapies. In the fast-growing GLP-1 segment (drugs for type-2 diabetes and obesity), Novo enjoys an even stronger position with ~54–55% global market share
– a leadership built on its flagship semaglutide-based products (Ozempic for diabetes and Wegovy for obesity). This entrenched market share reflects several durable advantages: a strong brand reputation with physicians and patients, extensive clinical data supporting its drugs, a global sales infrastructure, and significant manufacturing capacity (which it is aggressively expanding). These strengths create high barriers for new entrants. Moreover, Novo’s deep expertise in peptide therapeutics (like insulin and GLP-1 analogues) and decades of focused R&D contribute to a wide moat around its diabetes and obesity franchise.
Product Pipeline & Innovation: To sustain its dominance, Novo Nordisk has a robust pipeline targeting next-generation therapies. Notably, it is developing combination treatments and new molecules to extend the efficacy beyond current drugs. A prime example is CagriSema, a once-weekly combo of semaglutide (GLP-1) and cagrilintide (an amylin analog). Recent trial results for CagriSema are highly promising – the Phase 3 REDEFINE 1 trial showed ~22–23% average weight loss for obese patients on CagriSema, dramatically more than achieved by semaglutide (Wegovy) alone (~15%). This superior efficacy could help Novo defend its obesity leadership as competitors emerge. The company is also working on a “triple agonist” (a single drug targeting GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon receptors) now in Phase 1, and an innovative “amycretin” dual-agonist in early trials. In diabetes, Novo continues to improve oral semaglutide formulations and explore higher-dose regimens, while expanding into adjacent metabolic diseases (e.g. NASH/MAFLD as shown by the ESSENCE trial success in fatty liver disease) to broaden indications for semaglutide. Additionally, Novo maintains a strong rare disease segment (e.g. new hemophilia therapy Alhemo® launched) and is building a presence in cardiovascular and kidney diseases, recognizing the link between metabolic health and these areas. This pipeline depth suggests Novo is well-positioned to refresh its patent portfolio and sustain growth even as current products age.
Patent Expiration Outlook: Novo’s heavy reliance on semaglutide (the molecule behind Ozempic/Wegovy) does pose a long-term challenge, as patent expiries will eventually allow generics/biosimilars. Fortunately, in most major markets Novo has secured protection for semaglutide into the early 2030s – in the U.S., semaglutide is patent-protected until at least December 2031 (with additional patents possibly extending to 2033 or beyond)
. In Europe and Japan the timelines are similar, giving Novo roughly a decade of exclusivity left for its flagship. The nearest patent cliff is in China, where semaglutide’s patent expires in 2026
reuters.com
. China’s patent office even challenged Novo’s semaglutide patent validity, raising the risk of earlier generic entry
. As a result, Chinese firms are already developing ~15 Ozempic/Wegovy generics
aiming to launch as soon as legal barriers lift. While loss of the China market exclusivity after 2026 will introduce cheaper competitors, the impact may be partly offset by the enormous latent demand there (tens of millions of diabetic and obese patients) and Novo’s plan to supply that market before generics take hold
. Crucially, Novo’s pipeline (e.g. CagriSema, next-gen oral GLP-1s) is timed to come online as semaglutide ages, which should help replace expiring revenue with new patented products. Overall, Novo Nordisk’s market position is strong – it leads the current market and is investing to ensure it stays ahead of the pack in the long run.
3. Regulatory and Competitive Risks
U.S. Regulatory Challenges: Given its success, Novo Nordisk faces growing scrutiny from regulators and payers, especially in the critical U.S. market (which drives ~50% of its revenue). A key risk is drug pricing pressure. Under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Medicare is now empowered to negotiate prices on top-selling drugs. Notably, Ozempic (semaglutide) and Wegovy were selected for Medicare price negotiation by 2025, with negotiated prices to take effect in 2027
. This means Novo will likely be forced to give steep discounts on its GLP-1 drugs for Medicare patients in a few years, which could dent U.S. sales growth. (In the first round of talks, Medicare won 38–79% price cuts on other drugs
, indicating the scale of potential discounts.) Novo is fighting these measures – it has sued to block the IRA negotiation program and voiced “significant concerns” about its implementation
– but so far the law is moving forward. Aside from Medicare negotiations, Novo faces the usual regulatory risks: drug safety monitoring (any unforeseen side effect could prompt FDA warnings), and healthcare policy shifts (for instance, initiatives to cap insulin prices, though Novo’s newer growth is in non-insulin therapies). The company must also navigate U.S. reimbursement dynamics; insurers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) have pushed for prior authorizations and formulary exclusivity deals in the high-cost obesity drug segment, which could intensify as more patients seek coverage for drugs like Wegovy. Overall, regulatory and pricing pressures in the U.S. are a moderate long-term risk – likely manageable given Novo’s strong efficacy data (which supports the value of its drugs) but still something that could compress margins over time.
Competition in Obesity & Diabetes: Novo Nordisk’s phenomenal growth has attracted heavy competition, and the race for obesity and diabetes market share is accelerating. The most formidable competitor is Eli Lilly, whose drug tirzepatide (brand name Mounjaro for diabetes) is a dual GIP/GLP-1 agonist that has shown exceptional results. Tirzepatide is already approved for type-2 diabetes and is expected to gain FDA approval for obesity (branded as Zepbound) soon. In head-to-head terms, tirzepatide can induce weight loss on par with or even greater than semaglutide – Phase 3 trials in obesity showed ~20% weight reduction at the highest dose of tirzepatide. Lilly is rapidly gaining GLP-1 market share: in Q2 2024, Lilly’s GLP-1 sales reached $3.0 billion, not far behind Novo’s $5.4 billion for the quarter
. By some estimates Novo’s global GLP-1 share (54%) is down from prior levels as Lilly’s share climbs with Mounjaro. Beyond tirzepatide, Lilly’s pipeline could pose an even bigger long-term threat: their next-generation triple agonist retatrutide showed ~24% weight loss in just 48 weeks during Phase 2 trials
– a remarkable efficacy that hints at possibly 30%+ weight loss over a full course. Retatrutide’s results rival the best Novo has achieved (e.g. 22% in CagriSema’s trial) and, if Phase 3 is successful, Lilly could have a superior obesity drug on the market in a few years. Other pharmaceutical players are also entering the fray: Pfizer is developing oral GLP-1 drugs; Amgen and others have molecules in early trials (though some have faced setbacks). This intensifying competition means Novo Nordisk must continue innovating to defend its share. The company’s response appears proactive – e.g., pushing CagriSema through trials to compete with Lilly’s dual agonist, and exploring new mechanisms like the triple-agonist. Nonetheless, investors should expect that Novo’s growth will moderate as competitors divide up the soaring obesity/diabetes market. Pricing power may also erode in the face of multiple similar therapies (already, Lilly and Novo have engaged in high rebates to secure insurance coverage for their respective drugs).
Trial Outcomes & Pipeline Risks: While Novo’s recent trial results have been mostly positive, there is always risk associated with R&D. The CagriSema trials (REDEFINE program) have so far shown impressive efficacy without new safety issues – which bodes well for eventual approval – but until regulatory filing and review are complete, there remains uncertainty on ultimate market rollout timing. Similarly, Novo is running large cardiovascular outcomes trials (e.g. SELECT for Wegovy’s impact on heart attack risk, FLOW for kidney outcomes with semaglutide) and expanding indications (e.g. for NASH/liver fibrosis). Mixed or negative results in any of these could slow momentum or limit the addressable market. On the flip side, positive outcomes (such as the SELECT trial’s indication that Wegovy cuts cardiovascular risk) could boost demand but also attract more scrutiny from payers due to the broader use-case. In summary, Novo faces competitive and regulatory headwinds in the coming years: U.S. pricing reforms, fierce rival drugs from Lilly (and others), and the challenge of executing flawlessly on its R&D pipeline. These risks, however, are partly mitigated by the sheer scale of the market opportunity (hundreds of millions of patients worldwide) and Novo’s strong starting position as the incumbent leader with a proven portfolio.
4. Valuation Analysis
Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis: To gauge Novo Nordisk’s intrinsic value for a long-term investor, a DCF model can be informative. Using 2024 as a baseline (DKK ~101 billion net profit) and incorporating the company’s growth outlook, we project cash flows over the next decade and beyond. Novo’s own 2025 guidance calls for ~19–27% operating profit growth
; however, growth is expected to gradually decelerate as the business matures and competition increases. Assuming a scenario where free cash flow grows ~15% annually for the next 5 years, then moderates to mid-single-digit growth by the mid-2030s (ultimately ~3% terminal growth, roughly in line with global GDP/inflation), the DCF model indicates that Novo’s shares have significant intrinsic value. At an 8% discount rate, the present value from these cash flows is estimated around DKK 800 per share, notably higher than the current share price (approximately DKK 560–570 as of early 2025)
. Even under a more conservative 10% discount rate, the DCF valuation comes in around DKK ~690 per share (still above the market price). This suggests a margin of safety in the stock price, provided Novo can execute on the growth embedded in these assumptions. It’s worth noting that this DCF hinges on sustained high growth in the medium term and successful renewal of the product pipeline; if growth were to taper faster or if major setbacks occur, the intrinsic value would be lower. Overall, the DCF exercise implies that Novo Nordisk’s current valuation is not overly stretched for a long-term investor – the market appears to be pricing in a deceleration, yet the company’s cash-generation potential (with high 30%+ net margins) could justify upside in a continued growth scenario.
P/E and Peer Comparison: Novo Nordisk’s stock trades at a high but contextually reasonable multiple of earnings. Based on 2024 results, the P/E ratio is in the mid-20s (roughly 24–28x earnings)
. This is elevated compared to the broader pharmaceutical industry (many big pharma peers trade at 15–20x earnings), reflecting Novo’s superior growth profile. However, when compared to its direct peer Eli Lilly – which is similarly benefiting from the obesity/diabetes boom – Novo actually looks modestly valued. Lilly’s P/E is above 60x on trailing earnings
, indicating investors have priced in even more aggressive growth for Lilly. In fact, as of late 2024/early 2025, **Novo’s P/E (~25) is far below Lilly’s (~65–70)**
, despite both having blockbuster GLP-1 franchises. This disparity suggests Novo might be the more reasonably priced of the two obesity drug giants. It’s also notable that Novo’s PEG ratio (price/earnings-to-growth) is attractive given its ~20% earnings growth – the PEG is near 1.0, indicating the P/E is roughly in line with growth, whereas many biotech/pharma growth stories carry PEG well above 2. Of course, simple multiples should be viewed with caution: Novo’s stock surged in 2023 and then pulled back, and forward-looking multiples will depend on how quickly its earnings continue to rise. But in summary, Novo Nordisk’s valuation metrics appear fair relative to its growth and peers. The stock is not a cheap deep-value play, but for a global leader with a dominant franchise and double-digit growth, a mid-20s earnings multiple is justifiable. The current valuation leaves room for upside if Novo executes well, while providing some cushion (unlike its peer Lilly, which is priced for perfection).
5. Investment Recommendation
Risk–Reward Assessment: Novo Nordisk presents a compelling long-term investment case with some manageable risks. On the reward side, the company offers a rare combination of steady fundamentals and secular growth: it dominates a growing global market (diabetes and obesity treatments), has a track record of innovation, and enjoys exceptional profitability. The obesity epidemic and rising diabetes prevalence worldwide provide a long runway for growth – even 20 years out, these health challenges will likely be prevalent, and Novo is at the forefront of treatment. If Novo can maintain even a fraction of its recent growth rate (e.g. high-single-digit to low-double-digit annual growth), the compounding effect over two decades would be tremendous for investors. Furthermore, shareholders benefit from a reliable dividend (with nearly three decades of increases) and periodic buybacks, which add to total returns. On the risk side, investors must be comfortable with regulatory and competitive uncertainties. U.S. pricing reforms will probably squeeze margins on older drugs, and by the 2030s Novo will face patent cliffs on key products. The next few years will also determine how much market share rival Lilly can capture – a scenario where Lilly’s drugs outperform or others enter the market could slow Novo’s growth significantly. Additionally, execution risk exists around scaling up manufacturing (Novo has had supply constraints due to demand) and around R&D success (not every pipeline drug will pan out). These risks could lead to periods of stock volatility or even stagnation if mismanaged. However, Novo Nordisk has shown an ability to navigate industry challenges historically, adapting its portfolio (from insulin dominance to the GLP-1 revolution) and expanding new markets effectively. Its financial strength gives it resilience to invest through adversity.
20+ Year Outlook – Buy, Hold, or Avoid?: Considering the above, Novo Nordisk is a strong Buy for long-term investors (with a 4–5% portfolio allocation as proposed). The long-term growth story – tackling obesity and diabetes on a global scale – remains intact and arguably in early innings. Novo’s entrenched market position and pipeline innovation provide confidence that it can retain leadership even as competition rises. Importantly, the valuation does not appear excessive relative to the growth prospects; in fact, the recent pullback in share price and a P/E in the 20s means investors today are not over-paying for future growth
. For a 20-year horizon, short-term price fluctuations or year-to-year growth variances are less crucial than the durable trends: and those trends (increasing chronic disease prevalence, new treatment indications, and Novo’s expanding capacity to meet demand) favor continued value creation. That said, investors should monitor key risk factors over time – such as the outcome of U.S. Medicare price negotiations in 2025-2026, the progress of Lilly’s pipeline (e.g. if retatrutide nears approval), and Novo’s own product launches (e.g. CagriSema’s commercialization around 2026). Barring any drastic adverse developments in those areas, Novo Nordisk’s risk-reward profile looks attractive for a long-term, growth-oriented holding. In conclusion, Novo Nordisk is a high-quality company with secular growth drivers, and a prudent long-term investment at ~4-5% portfolio allocation is warranted – the stock is a buy for investors seeking to benefit from the sustained fight against diabetes and obesity worldwide.
Sources:
- Novo Nordisk 2024 Investor Presentation and Annual Report
- Reuters and news reports on regulatory and competitive landscape
- Clinical trial data and company disclosures on product pipeline (CagriSema, etc.)
- Market share and peer financial comparisons
(Novo vs. Lilly)
2 « J'aime »