Nokia Oyj ranks among the weaker positions in its peer group, with a relatively even profile across the main dimensions. That creates a tension: current price behavior looks stronger than the structural profile would suggest.
Nokia: Discounted for Persistent Weakness
52w drawdown -44.2% · 21d vs sector -42.2%
Peer-relative scores, weakest to strongest
Nokia Oyj develops telecommunications network infrastructure and related technology solutions for global operators and enterprises.
The market prices Nokia as a cyclical recovery story, where sustained margin weakness and capital inefficiency versus peers force a valuation discount. With a ROIC of just 2.1% (well below peer median in FY25) and operating margins at 5.4% (trailing the sector average in Q1 2026), the market continues to penalize Nokia’s shares relative to sector standards. This underperformance leads the market to consistently withhold any quality premium from the shares, even as AI and cloud segments grow. In telecommunications, sustained capital returns are a key quality anchor; Nokia lags competitors here despite strategic initiatives. As long as these gaps in margins and capital returns persist, the market maintains the discount and refrains from re-rating the stock. Only a clear and sustained improvement in capital returns and margins to peer levels over at least two quarters would break the current valuation framing.
Break down NOKIA.HE's position across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
This analysis is rule-based and descriptive. Peer-relative scores are derived from functional peer group comparisons using publicly available financial data. Scores reflect structural positioning only and do not constitute investment advice, a buy or sell recommendation, or a forecast of future performance. AssetNext peer scores are recalculated periodically as new data becomes available.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.