Hot Stocks: Brokerages on RIL, Entero Healthcare, Natco Pharma and Persistent Systems

Nomura on Persistent Systems: Neutral| Target Rs 3400

Nomura maintained a neutral rating on Persistent Systems but slashed the target price to Rs 3400 from Rs 3800 earlier.

Growth remains resilient and margins disappointed. Deal wins have moderated. Going forward, strong execution is likely to help deliver industry-leading growth.

Margin expansion aspiration pushed out due to continued macro weakness. The global investment bank reduced earnings per share (EPS) estimates by 9-11% over FY25-26.

Investec on Natco Pharma: Buy| Target Rs 1200

Investec maintained a buy rating on Natco Pharma but raised the target price to Rs 1200 from Rs 710 earlier.

It has the ability to generate significant EBITDA for a few years followed by a lull of 1-2 years. It should generate significant EBITDA even post gRevlimid in FY28-FY33.

With its track record, Natco could emerge as a key player in GLP-1s/peptides. The company has stepped up to build a larger base business which is also gaining traction.

Investec on Entero Healthcare: Buy| Target Rs 1590

Investec initiated a buy rating on Entero Healthcare with a target price of Rs 1590. The company has emerged as a top consolidator, leaving its peers behind with a series of well-curated acquisitions.

Key positives include strong balance sheet post-IPO, management focus, operational excellence and impressive acquisition track record.

The global investment bank expects 30%/59% revenue/EBITDA CAGR over FY24-26.

CLSA on RIL: Outperform| Target Rs 3300

CLSA downgraded RIL to outperform from a buy earlier but raised the target price to Rs 3300 from Rs 3060 earlier.

The company reported in-line quarters on overall numbers. Jio performance was in line but retail disappointed.

CLSA raised the target but downgraded the stock from a buy to Outperform after the recent rally. It also slashed EPS estimate for FY25/26 by 2-5%

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)