Home Compare SEB-A.ST vs VATN.SW
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Banks - Regional

Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) vs Valiant Holding: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) holds the cleaner structural position, with profitability as the main driver and growth adding further support. On the market side, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) is in better shape — its trend is intact while Valiant's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ)'s lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Both peer scores are relative to the STOXX 600 universe, making them directly comparable.

Updated 2026-08-16

The comparison is mainly decided in profitability, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight. The overall score gap is 14 points in favour of Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ).

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Banks - Regional

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. SEB-A.ST and VATN.SW share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how SEB-A.ST and Valiant each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
SEB-A.ST
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ)
55
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
VATN.SW
Valiant Holding AG
41
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

Score differences across key dimensions.

Dimension spread: SEB-A.ST vs VATN.SW Profitability 40 0 Stability 62 67 Valuation 73 74 Growth 42 27 SEB-A.ST VATN.SW
Gap Ranking
#1 Profitability +40
#2 Growth +15
#3 Stability +5
#4 Valuation +1
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for SEB-A.ST and VATN.SW Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer SEB-A.STVATN.SW Relative valuation Structural strength

The setup is mixed: neither company clearly combines the stronger profile with the more supportive price setup.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where SEB-A.ST and VATN.SW each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY SEB-A.ST Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 11 pct gap VATN.SW Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 99th 88th
SEB-A.ST (99th percentile) and VATN.SW (88th percentile) both sit in the upper portion of their own 5-year ranges. The historical entry context is broadly similar for both. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Profitability
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) sits higher in the group on profitability, adding to the overall structural advantage.
Growth
Growth also leans toward Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ), reinforcing the broader structural lead.
Profitability — Dominant Gap
SEB-A.ST
40
VATN.SW
0
Gap+40in favour of SEB-A.ST

The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 17.2-point operating margin advantage.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Valiant Holding AG still shows lower market-fundamental divergence, which keeps the wider picture mixed rather than completely one-sided.

What this means for the comparison

Profitability is the clearest driver, and growth also supports Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ)'s broader structural position.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the SEB-A.ST vs VATN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar profitability-driven comparisons

Explore how SEB-A.ST and VATN.SW each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

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.