CLSA continues to like HUL, ITC, and Dabur India while it has maintained its sell rating on Britannia Industries and Nestle India on account of high valuations.
We have collated a list of recommendations from top brokerage firms from ETNow and other sources:
Jefferies on Sunteck Realty: Buy| Target Rs 415
Jefferies maintained a buy rating on Sunteck Realty with a target price of Rs 415.
“Weak BKC performance and some project delays led to the cuts. A 25% growth guidance for FY24 looks achievable as cash flow remains strong,” it said.
Credit Suisse on Capital Goods, L&T, UltraTech Cement, and Cummins India:
Credit Suisse maintained an underperform rating on Container Corp, ABB India.
Container Corporation: “Weak Exim cycle, losing market share, lack of any evidence of road-to-rail shift so far, and lack of near-term visibility on divestment catalyst,” the brokerage said.
ABB India: According to Credit Suisse, there are high valuations pricing in a 20-year CAGR of >20% at 13%+ EBITDA margin
Voltas: “The market share and margin losses have given leadership status in a segment with prevailing tough competition,” it said
Credit Suisse prefers L&T, UltraTech Cement, and Cummins India.
L&T: Late cycle beneficiary and has still-attractive valuations, it said.
UltraTech Cement: “Partly cyclical volume growth, commodities pullback particularly pet-coke and reasonable valuation,” the brokerage said.
Cummins India: Attractive valuations particularly in the context of peers with modest cyclical play, it added.
CLSA on Consumer Goods: Like HUL, ITC and Dabur India
CLSA likes HUL, ITC, and Dabur India in the Consumer Goods segment and has a sell rating on Britannia Industries and Nestle India on high valuations.
The global investment bank expects operating margins to show only a modest improvement in FY24.
“The A&P spend is still not at normal levels. Investors should watch out for Rural demand revival key; El Nino presents a key risk,” it said.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of Economic Times)