EchoStar (SATS)
NASDAQCommunication ServicesTelecommunications ServicesSnapshot 2026-09-14
$86.44-0.46%
Close 2026-08-31 · 1-day change
NASDAQCommunication ServicesTelecommunications ServicesSnapshot 2026-09-14
Research Workspace
Put SATS beside peers and holdings, graph the same metric, and keep your notes with the evidence.
Daily closes. Earnings/event dots are placed inline.
Primary pillar broken — Operating income improves to positive territory: metric not reported.
View ThesisRevenue is contracting — down about 5% over the past year.
View GrowthRanks in the weakest quality tier of its industry — roughly the bottom 25%, softest on returns on capital.
View QualityManagement screens weak on capital allocation, earnings delivery, margins, the balance sheet.
View ManagementExpectations look reasonable — what the market is pricing in sits in line with or below what analysts forecast.
View ValuationModerate volatility — typically moves about 2% a day.
View RiskSATS must improve its operating income to justify its current valuation. Revenue growth has been steady, but the latest results indicate challenges ahead. It trades at 2.1× price-to-sales, compared to a peer median of 1.1×. This premium suggests the market expects more growth than is currently reflected in its performance. The primary risk is the bankruptcy of its Hughes unit, which could undermine financial flexibility. Peer multiples imply a price about 1% below where it trades. This read is provisional.
Trailing returns as of 2026-08-31. SATS is total return (includes dividends); the S&P 500 benchmark is price return (the index excludes dividends).
Based on 6 analysts currently covering SATS (as of Jun 2026).
Analyst ratings and price targets are third-party Wall Street estimates, not QuarterlyIQ’s view. Not investment advice.
Continue this research
Compare SATS with peers and holdings, graph the same reported metric, keep your questions beside the evidence, and return when the facts change.
Free account required to save the handoff. No credit card.
| Compare | Company | Living FV | P/E | Revenue % | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SATS Selected company | Graph | Compare | Trend | Review | |
| Peer Add a competitor | Graph | Compare | Trend | Review | |
| Holding Compare a holding | Graph | Compare | Trend | Review |
Selected metric trend
Quarterly · checked companies · value or % of revenue
A consensus fair price across 0 valuation methods, at three horizons. As of 2026-09-14. Estimates are diagnostics, not price targets. Short-horizon estimates are close to coin-flips, so confidence is a method-agreement read, not a prediction.
Today's peer multiple on trailing earnings, with no growth credited. This is the headline read.
Adds projected growth, so it leans optimistic by design. Read it as upside context, not a base case.
A price-focused, side-by-side fair-value read versus Communication Services (broad) — fair value, gap to price, and forward P/E.
Our valuation methods disagree too much on this name right now. Rather than print a number we don't believe, we're holding it back until they converge.
Compare the value case
Put SATS next to peers and holdings, compare Living FV and multiples, then graph the driver behind the difference.
Threatens: Restructuring for strategic optionality
Regulatory scrutiny could hinder strategic optionality.
Not investment advice. Scores describe historical and current data; they are not forecasts of future returns. Consult a licensed advisor before making investment decisions.
End-of-day figures as of 2026-08-31. EPS is implied from price ÷ P/E. Not investment advice.
A long-thesis check that carries the widest uncertainty of the three horizons.
Bottom 25% on quality vs scored peers
Direction of the business behind the multiple. Bands are backend reads; trailing-12-month basis.
TTM earnings are negative. P/E-based methods drop out and the estimate leans on sales- and cash-flow-based methods. A data condition, not a forward call.
Advances: Restructuring for strategic optionality
Approval enhances financial flexibility for restructuring efforts.
Threatens: Increase financial flexibility for M&A
Liabilities may hinder financial flexibility for M&A.
Advances: Increase financial flexibility for M&A
Deconsolidation aligns with M&A financial flexibility objective.
Threatens: Restructuring for strategic optionality
Bankruptcy filing undermines restructuring and financial flexibility objectives.
Threatens: Restructuring for strategic optionality
Bankruptcy undermines restructuring efforts and financial flexibility.
Advances: Increase financial flexibility for M&A
Sale enhances financial flexibility for future M&A opportunities.
Threatens: CEO transition to drive strategic changes
CEO resignation may hinder strategic changes.