EnerSys
ENS
$147.65
-2.43%
EnerSys is a global industrial technology company that manufactures stored energy solutions — lead-acid and lithium-ion batteries, chargers, power conversion equipment, and outdoor enclosure systems — serving motive power (forklifts and material handling), telecom/broadband, utility, UPS, and aerospace/defense end markets across four reporting segments: Energy Systems, Motive Power, Specialty, and New Ventures. As the largest industrial battery maker in North America with a scaled global footprint of roughly 9,700 employees, EnerSys occupies a defensive, replacement-demand-driven niche rather than a high-growth technology lane, though it is repositioning toward higher-margin lithium and data-center/utility-scale energy storage. The current investor debate centers on whether the company's margin expansion story — gross margin has climbed from roughly 28% to over 33% year-over-year as pricing and mix improve — can offset softness in motive power volumes and tariff-related cost pressure, while the New Ventures segment and thin-film lithium investments are being watched as optionality. The stock's sharp recent drawdown despite a still-positive one-year return reflects a market increasingly skeptical that the earnings trajectory implied by earlier optimism will materialize, with the narrative shifting from 'margin recovery' to 'demand durability' amid a broad industrial selloff.…
ENS
EnerSys
$147.65
Related headlines
Investment Opinion: Should I buy ENS Today?
Rating: Hold. EnerSys is a cash-generative, replacement-demand industrial trading at 22.16x trailing earnings after a 41.41% drawdown to $147.02, and the core thesis is that a roughly 11% trailing FCF yield ($717.3M TTM on a $6.5B market cap) and 510 bps of gross margin expansion (33.49% vs. 28.36% a year ago) provide a valuation floor, but a confirmed downtrend, -35.49% six-month relative strength versus SPY, and unreliable sell-side coverage argue against aggressive accumulation before a higher low forms. The lone analyst in the dataset implies $14.85 EPS and $4.25B revenue, figures irreconcilable with reported $3.19 quarterly EPS and a ~$3.8B run-rate, so no credible consensus target or implied upside can be computed — the ten Buy/Outperform ratings from BTIG, Oppenheimer, and Roth are directionally supportive but low-signal.
Supporting evidence is mixed but tilts toward patience rather than purchase. On the positive side, Q1 FY2027 revenue of $935.6M grew 4.77% year-over-year, operating margin nearly doubled to 16.18% from 9.68%, net income reached $116.45M (12.45% net margin versus 6.43%), and the balance sheet is solid with a 2.66 current ratio, 0.62 debt-to-equity, and $217.7M of quarterly FCF on just $12.4M capex. Against that, the trailing PE of 22.16x sits in the upper third of the stock's 7.9x-27.4x historical band, EV/EBITDA of 14.18x and P/B of 3.41x (versus 1.8x-2.0x in 2024-2025) still embed a quality premium, and revenue has oscillated in a $893M-$988M band for four quarters with the latest quarter sequentially down from $987.9M — no volume acceleration to justify the multiple.
The thesis would break in either direction on margin durability. This Hold would upgrade to Buy if gross margin holds above 30% for two consecutive quarters while revenue stabilizes above $950M and the stock reclaims $160 on volume, or if the PE compresses toward the mid-teens (~$100-$110) on intact earnings. It would downgrade to Sell if gross margin reverts toward the 28% prior-year level, if the $142.58 November 5 low breaks on volume, or if a capitulation downgrade emerges from the currently unanimous bullish coverage. Net verdict: fairly valued to slightly rich on earnings, cheap on cash flow — a stock to own for its FCF yield, not to chase into a falling knife.
Sign up to view all
ENS 12-Month Price Forecast
EnerSys presents a genuine tug-of-war between cash-flow value and earnings-multiple risk: an ~11% FCF yield and a 2.66 current ratio make the downside fundamentally cushioned, while a 22.16x trailing PE on 4.77% revenue growth and a stock at its 52-week low with -35.49% six-month relative strength make the technical and valuation setup unattractive. The single most important variable is whether the 510 bps of gross margin improvement is structural — pricing, lithium mix, cost actions — or cyclical; the sequential swing from 33.49% to 29.44% and back suggests the market is right to discount durability until proven otherwise. Analyst sentiment is uniformly positive but low-quality, with one contributing estimate that is internally inconsistent with reported results and ten Buy/Outperform ratings that failed to protect the stock through a 36% six-month decline. I would upgrade to bullish on a confirmed higher low above $142.58 plus two quarters of gross margin above 30% and revenue above $950M, and downgrade to bearish on a volume break of $142.58 or gross margin reverting toward 28%.
Wall Street consensus
Most Wall Street analysts maintain a constructive view on EnerSys's 12-month outlook, with a consensus price target around $249.48 and implied upside of +69.0% versus the current price.
Average Target
$249.48
5 analysts
Implied Upside
+69.0%
vs. current price
Analyst Count
5
covering this stock
Price Range
$203 - $280
Analyst target range
Analyst coverage is extremely thin, with only 1 analyst providing estimates in the dataset, which precludes a meaningful Buy/Hold/Sell distribution or consensus target price — insufficient analyst coverage is available to calculate implied upside. The single analyst's estimates imply EPS of $14.85 (range $14.77-$14.91) and revenue of $4.25 billion (range $4.23B-$4.26B), figures that are wildly inconsistent with the company's actual quarterly EPS of $3.19 and annualized revenue run-rate near $3.8 billion, suggesting the estimate data is unreliable or mis-scaled and should not be used for valuation. The institutional ratings history is more useful: BTIG has maintained a Buy rating through multiple updates (including an upgrade from Neutral in December 2025 and reaffirmations in February, May, June, and August 2026), Oppenheimer has consistently rated Outperform, and Roth Capital has stayed at Buy — a uniformly bullish stance that has clearly failed to protect the stock from a 36% six-month decline.
The target range cannot be reliably established given the single-analyst dataset, but the pattern of ratings is telling: every one of the ten institutional actions in the past year has been Buy or Outperform, with zero downgrades, even as the stock fell from roughly $240 to $147 — a classic case of stale bullish coverage lagging price action, which often precedes eventual capitulation downgrades and can create further downside pressure. The wide gap between analyst enthusiasm and market reality signals high uncertainty and weak conviction in the sell-side view; with only one contributing analyst, price discovery is inefficient, liquidity and institutional sponsorship are likely limited relative to large-cap peers, and volatility should be expected to remain elevated. Until coverage broadens and estimates are reconciled with reported results, investors should treat the bullish ratings as low-signal and rely on the fundamental and technical evidence, which currently point to a stock in a confirmed downtrend with improving but potentially peaking margins.
Bulls vs Bears: ENS Investment Factors
The bear case currently has stronger evidence: the stock is in a confirmed, accelerating downtrend at its 52-week low, relative strength is deeply negative on every horizon, and the 22.16x trailing PE is still in the upper third of its historical band despite a 41% drawdown. The bull case rests on genuinely impressive margin expansion (gross margin 33.49% versus 28.36% a year ago) and an ~11% FCF yield, but the sequential margin compression from Q1 to Q4 FY2026 and the revenue band of $893M-$988M with no acceleration undercut the durability of that story. The single most important tension is whether the 510 bps of gross margin improvement is structural (pricing, lithium mix, cost actions) or cyclical — if margins hold above 30% while revenue stabilizes, the ~11% FCF yield makes the stock cheap; if margins revert toward 28%, the current PE is a trap and the downtrend extends. Until a higher low forms above $142.58 and coverage broadens beyond one analyst, the weight of evidence favors caution over accumulation.
Bullish
- Margins expanded ~510 bps YoY: Q1 FY2027 gross margin reached 33.49% versus 28.36% a year earlier, with operating margin nearly doubling to 16.18% from 9.68% and EBITDA margin at 18.82% versus 11.63%. This is genuine operating leverage from pricing, mix, and cost actions, not just accounting noise, and it is the single strongest fundamental datapoint in the file.
- FCF yield near 11% on $717M TTM: Free cash flow of $717.3 million TTM against a $6.5 billion market cap implies roughly an 11% FCF yield, with $217.7 million generated in the latest quarter on only $12.4 million of capex. That cash generation funds $49.96 million of buybacks, $9.56 million of dividends, and $70 million of debt repayment without external financing.
- Balance sheet provides real downside cushion: Current ratio of 2.66, quick ratio of 1.83, and debt-to-equity of 0.62 with interest coverage in the 9x-14x range mean the company can absorb a demand downturn without a liquidity event. Interest expense of $10.6 million in Q1 is easily covered by $151.4 million of operating income.
- Revenue still growing 4.77% YoY: Q1 FY2027 revenue of $935.6 million rose 4.77% from $893.0 million a year ago, and the trailing four quarters have held in a $893M-$988M band rather than collapsing. For a replacement-demand industrial battery business, stable top line plus expanding margins is a workable combination.
Bearish
- Stock at 52-week low, downtrend intact: At $147.02 the shares sit just 1.5% above the 52-week low of roughly $144.90 and about 41% below the cycle high near $250, with a max drawdown of -41.41%. The 1-month change of -19.44% is worse than the 3-month -23.32%, meaning the decline is accelerating rather than stabilizing.
- Severe and worsening relative weakness: Relative strength versus SPY is -35.49% over six months and -18.41% over three months, while the 1-month relative strength of -14.45% against SPY's -4.99% shows the weakness is company-specific, not just beta. The stock has massively underperformed during the decline despite a still-positive 13.74% one-year return.
- PE of 22.2x is not cheap for 4.8% growth: Trailing PE of 22.16x sits in the upper third of the stock's own 7.9x-27.4x historical band even after a 41% drawdown, and EV/EBITDA of 14.18x and P/B of 3.41x (versus 1.8x-2.0x in 2024-2025) suggest the de-rating may not be complete. A 22x multiple on a low-single-digit-growth industrial with 12.7% operating margin leaves little room for error.
- Margins may be peaking, not durable: Gross margin fell from 33.49% in Q1 FY2027 to 29.44% in the March quarter before recovering, and net margin compressed from 12.45% to 7.81% over the same span. If margins mean-revert toward the 28%-30% prior-year range, the effective PE rises sharply and the current multiple becomes materially less attractive.
ENS Technical Analysis
EnerSys is in a clear, sustained downtrend that has overwhelmed its longer-term gains: the stock is up 13.74% over the trailing year but has fallen 36.03% over six months and 23.32% over three months, a classic distribution pattern where early strength gave way to persistent selling. At $147.02, the shares sit just 1.5% above the 52-week low of roughly $144.90 (implied by the -41.41% max drawdown from the cycle high near $250) and approximately 41% below the 52-week high — effectively trading at the very bottom of its annual range, which signals capitulation rather than a healthy pullback and raises the risk of a falling-knife entry. The 1-year return of +13.74% versus SPY's +9.59% masks severe relative deterioration: relative strength is -35.49% over six months and -18.41% over three months, meaning the stock has massively underperformed the market during the decline.
Short-term momentum is decisively negative and accelerating to the downside: the 1-month change of -19.44% is worse than the 3-month -23.32%, indicating the pace of decline has intensified in recent weeks rather than stabilized, and the 1-month relative strength of -14.45% versus SPY's -4.99% shows the weakness is company-specific, not merely beta. The most recent sessions are particularly alarming — a drop from $159.95 on October 30 to $142.58 on November 5 (-10.9% in four sessions) followed by a modest bounce to $147.02 (+3.11% on the day) — a pattern consistent with panic selling and a tentative oversold rebound rather than a durable bottom. With no RSI provided, the magnitude of the move (a 41% peak-to-trough drawdown) and the volume of 460,408 shares suggest heavy institutional distribution; the single-day +3.11% bounce off the low is the first sign of buyers stepping in but lacks confirmation.
Key technical levels are now well-defined: support sits at the $142.58 recent low, with a breakdown below that opening the door to the $130s given the absence of prior consolidation in the 180-day window; resistance is layered at $160 (the late-October shelf), then $170-$176 (the mid-October congestion), with the 52-week high near $250 as the long-term ceiling. A reclaim of $160 would be the first evidence of a bottoming process, while a break of $142.58 on volume would confirm the downtrend and likely trigger further momentum-driven selling. Volatility is elevated — the 41.41% max drawdown and a 6-month decline of 36% versus SPY's -0.54% imply a beta well above 1 and substantial idiosyncratic risk, meaning position sizing should be conservative and stop-loss discipline is essential until a higher low forms.
Beta
1.20
1.20x market volatility
Max Drawdown
-41.4%
Largest decline past year
52-Week Range
$131-$244
Price range past year
Annual Return
+6.6%
Cumulative gain past year
| Period | ENS Return | S&P 500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1m | -17.2% | -2.4% |
| 3m | -25.2% | -2.3% |
| 6m | -37.7% | +2.8% |
| 1y | +6.6% | +11.3% |
| ytd | -2.0% | +11.4% |
Bobby - Your AI Investment Partner
Get real-time data, AI-driven personalized investment analysis to make smarter investment decisions
ENS Fundamental Analysis
Revenue is growing modestly but the trajectory is uneven: the most recent quarter (ended July 5, 2026) posted $935.6 million, up 4.77% year-over-year from $893.0 million, but sequentially down from $987.9 million in the March quarter and below the $951.3 million reported in the September 2025 quarter. The multi-quarter pattern shows revenue oscillating in a $893M-$988M band with no clear acceleration — Q1 FY2027's $935.6M sits mid-range — and the segment mix (product revenue of $835.6M versus service of $100.0M) confirms this is a hardware-driven business where volume leverage is limited. The 4.77% growth rate is respectable for an industrial but insufficient to justify a premium multiple, and the sequential decline from Q4's $987.9M suggests demand is softening rather than inflecting upward, which is the core fundamental concern behind the stock's de-rating.
Profitability is actually the bright spot and has improved materially: Q1 FY2027 net income of $116.45 million on $935.6 million revenue produced a 12.45% net margin, up sharply from 6.43% in the year-ago quarter ($57.46M on $893.0M), while gross margin expanded to 33.49% from 28.36% a year earlier — a roughly 510 basis point improvement driven by pricing, mix, and cost actions. Operating margin reached 16.18% versus 9.68% a year ago, and EBITDA margin of 18.82% (versus 11.63%) shows the operating leverage is real; however, the sequential trend is less flattering, with gross margin down from 33.49% in Q1 to 29.44% in the March quarter before recovering, and net margin compressing from 12.45% to 7.81% over the same span, suggesting some of the improvement is not yet durable. The trailing net margin of 7.83% and operating margin of 12.70% (per key metrics) are solidly mid-pack for electrical equipment, and the 15.41% ROE is respectable but not exceptional for a capital-intensive manufacturer.
Balance sheet and cash generation are healthy and provide a cushion: the current ratio of 2.66 and quick ratio of 1.83 indicate strong liquidity, debt-to-equity of 0.62 is moderate, and interest coverage of roughly 9x-14x (depending on the period) is comfortable. Free cash flow is robust — $717.3 million TTM, with $217.7 million generated in the most recent quarter alone against just $12.4 million of capex, implying a very high FCF conversion and a trailing FCF yield of roughly 11% on the $6.5 billion market cap. Management is actively returning capital ($49.96 million of buybacks and $9.56 million of dividends in Q1) and deleveraging ($70 million of debt repayment), which is supportive, but the low dividend yield of 0.59% and payout ratio of 13% mean shareholder returns are modest relative to the cash generation — the company has ample internal funding capacity and does not depend on external financing, a genuine strength in a downturn.
Quarterly Revenue
$935641000.0B
2026-07
Revenue YoY Growth
+4.8%
YoY Comparison
Gross Margin
33.5%
Latest Quarter
Free Cash Flow
$717312000.0B
Last 12 Months
Revenue & Net Income Trends (2 Years)
Revenue Breakdown
Open an Account, get $2 TSLA now!
Valuation Analysis: Is ENS Overvalued?
Because EnerSys is profitable (net income of $116.45 million in the latest quarter and positive trailing earnings), the PE ratio is the appropriate primary metric: the trailing PE stands at 22.16x, while the forward PE of -1.55x is nonsensical and reflects a data anomaly (the 'forward' figure appears to be a mislabeled PEG ratio rather than a true forward multiple), so it should be disregarded. On a trailing basis, 22.2x for a low-single-digit-growth industrial with 12.7% operating margins is not cheap, and the EV/EBITDA of 14.18x and P/S of 1.73x suggest the market is still assigning a modest quality premium despite the price collapse; the P/B of 3.41x is elevated relative to the 1.8x-2.0x levels seen in 2024-2025, implying book value has not kept pace with the prior price appreciation.
Peer comparison is constrained by the absence of a formal industry-average multiple in the provided valuation data, but the stock's own history offers a clear benchmark: the trailing PE of 22.16x compares to a historical range of roughly 7.9x-27.4x over the past several years, placing it in the upper-middle of its own band, while the P/S of 1.73x is far below the 8.31x recorded in the July 2026 quarter (a period of inflated price) but above the 3.7x-4.7x levels of 2023-2025. Against the electrical equipment sector, where mid-teens to low-20s PE multiples are typical for mature industrial battery and power equipment names, EnerSys at 22x trailing looks fairly valued to slightly rich given its 4.77% revenue growth — the premium is not obviously justified by superior growth, though the margin expansion and 15.4% ROE provide partial support.
Historical context is the most instructive lens: the stock's PE has ranged from about 7.9x (December 2024) to 27.4x (March 2022), and the current 22.16x sits in the upper third of that band even after a 41% drawdown — a warning that the de-rating may not be complete. The P/S of 1.73x, by contrast, is near the low end of its multi-year range (versus 8.31x in July 2026 and 4.0x-4.9x in 2023), suggesting the sales multiple has compressed dramatically and could be approaching value territory if margins hold. The tension between an elevated PE (earnings may be peaking) and a depressed P/S (revenue is stable) implies the market is pricing in earnings normalization — if margins mean-revert toward the 28%-30% gross margin of prior years, the effective PE would rise sharply, making the current multiple less attractive than it appears.
PE
22.2x
Latest Quarter
vs. Historical
High-End
5-Year PE Range 9x~23x
vs. Industry Avg
24.4x
Industry PE ~24.4x*
EV/EBITDA
14.2x
Enterprise Value Multiple
Investment Risk Disclosure
Financial and operational risks center on margin durability and revenue stagnation. Gross margin swung from 33.49% in Q1 FY2027 down to 29.44% in Q4 FY2026 before recovering, and net margin moved from 12.45% to 7.81% over the same span, showing the improvement is not yet stable; a reversion toward the 28%-30% prior-year range would sharply raise the effective PE from 22.16x. Revenue has oscillated in a $893M-$988M band for four quarters with the latest quarter sequentially down from $987.9M to $935.6M, so there is no volume growth to offset pricing pressure, and the business is hardware-heavy ($835.6M product versus $100.0M service revenue), limiting recurring revenue leverage. Debt-to-equity of 0.62 and interest expense of $10.6M per quarter are manageable against $151.4M of operating income, but tariff-related cost pressure on a global manufacturing footprint remains an unquantified margin risk. Market and competitive risks are dominated by valuation compression and broken momentum. At 22.16x trailing PE, 14.18x EV/EBITDA, and 3.41x P/B, the stock still carries a quality premium despite 4.77% revenue growth, and the PE sits in the upper third of its 7.9x-27.4x historical range — a further de-rating toward the mid-teens would imply roughly $100-$110 per share. Relative strength of -35.49% over six months versus SPY's -0.54% and a 1-month relative strength of -14.45% versus SPY's -4.99% confirm the weakness is idiosyncratic, implying a beta well above 1 and high sensitivity to any negative company-specific news. Competitive disruption from lithium transition timing, thin-film lithium investment execution, and motive power volume softness are the operating threats, while thin analyst coverage (one contributing analyst, all ten ratings Buy/Outperform with zero downgrades) raises the risk of capitulation downgrades that could trigger further institutional selling. The worst-case scenario is a margin mean-reversion quarter combined with continued motive power volume decline and a capitulation downgrade, which would break the $142.58 recent low and open the $130s given the absence of prior consolidation in the 180-day window. From the current $147.02, a move to the 52-week low of roughly $144.90 is only about -1.5%, but a full retracement of the 41.41% max drawdown from the ~$250 cycle high implies a realistic downside of -35% to -40% in an adverse scenario, and a PE compression to the 2024-era 7.9x-12x range on current earnings would imply $50-$80 per share. Position sizing should be conservative and stop-loss discipline essential until a confirmed higher low forms above $142.58 on volume.
FAQ
The most severe risk is margin durability: gross margin swung from 33.49% in Q1 FY2027 to 29.44% in Q4 FY2026 before recovering, and net margin moved from 12.45% to 7.81% over the same span, so a reversion toward 28.36% would sharply raise the effective PE from 22.16x and force a de-rating. Second is technical and momentum risk — the stock is at its 52-week low with a 1-month decline of -19.44% that is steeper than the 3-month -23.32%, and a break of $142.58 on volume would open the $130s with a realistic -35% to -40% downside to the full drawdown. Third is revenue stagnation and demand risk: revenue has oscillated in a $893M-$988M band for four quarters, sequentially down from $987.9M to $935.6M, with motive power volume softness and tariff-related cost pressure on a global manufacturing footprint. Fourth is coverage and liquidity risk — only one contributing analyst, ten stale Buy/Outperform ratings that failed to protect the stock through a 36% six-month decline, and a capitulation downgrade could accelerate institutional selling in a name with limited sponsorship.
The base case (55% probability) targets $140-$175, with the stock basing near the $142.58 low while gross margin normalizes into the high-20s to low-30s and revenue oscillates in the $893M-$988M band, anchored by $717.3M TTM FCF that funds buybacks and debt paydown but caps multiple expansion at 22.16x trailing PE. The bear case (25% probability) targets $105-$142 on a margin mean-reversion quarter that breaks the November low and tests the mid-teens PE implied by roughly $100-$110 per share. The bull case (20% probability) targets $185-$210 if gross margin holds in the low-30s for consecutive quarters, motive power volumes stabilize, and New Ventures or thin-film lithium contracts tied to data-center or utility-scale storage begin to show in orders, allowing the stock to reclaim the $160 shelf and the $170-$176 congestion. The base case is most likely, and its key assumption is that margins settle in the 29%-32% range rather than reverting to the 28.36% trough or holding at 33.49%.
The answer depends on the metric: on earnings ENS looks fairly valued to slightly rich at 22.16x trailing PE, which sits in the upper third of its own 7.9x-27.4x historical band even after a 41.41% drawdown, while EV/EBITDA of 14.18x and P/B of 3.41x (versus 1.8x-2.0x in 2024-2025) still embed a quality premium. On cash flow it looks cheap, with a P/CF of 11.88x and an ~11% FCF yield on $717.3M TTM free cash flow against a $6.5B market cap. The P/S of 1.73x is near the low end of its multi-year range (versus 8.31x in July 2026 and 4.0x-4.9x in 2023), suggesting the sales multiple has already compressed heavily. The market is effectively pricing earnings normalization — if gross margin reverts toward the 28%-30% prior-year range, the effective PE rises sharply and the current multiple becomes a trap; if margins hold in the low-30s, the FCF yield makes the stock genuinely undervalued. Net verdict: fairly valued on earnings, cheap on cash flow, with the margin trajectory as the swing factor.
From a risk/reward standpoint ENS is a watchlist candidate rather than an immediate buy: the ~11% trailing FCF yield ($717.3M TTM on a $6.5B market cap) and 2.66 current ratio limit fundamental downside, but the stock sits just 1.5% above its 52-week low near $144.90 and has fallen 19.44% in the past month with relative strength of -35.49% versus SPY over six months, so entry timing matters enormously. The biggest downside risk is a margin mean-reversion quarter that breaks $142.58 and opens the $130s, with a full retracement of the 41.41% max drawdown implying -35% to -40% from current levels. Upside is capped near the $170-$176 October congestion absent an earnings inflection, and no credible analyst target can be computed because the single contributing estimate ($14.85 EPS, $4.25B revenue) is irreconcilable with reported $3.19 quarterly EPS and a ~$3.8B run-rate. It is a reasonable buy only for patient value investors who can tolerate volatility and accumulate on a confirmed higher low above $142.58 with gross margin holding above 30%, not for momentum or short-term traders.
ENS is better suited to a long-term holding period of at least 12-24 months than to short-term trading: the thesis rests on cash-flow compounding ($717.3M TTM FCF, $49.96M of quarterly buybacks, $70M of debt repayment) and on margin durability proving out over multiple quarters, neither of which resolves quickly. Short-term traders face an unfavorable setup — a confirmed downtrend at the 52-week low, a 41.41% max drawdown, and a 1-month decline of -19.44% that is accelerating, implying a beta well above 1 and elevated idiosyncratic volatility. The dividend is minimal (0.59% yield, 13% payout), so there is no income cushion to compensate for waiting, and earnings visibility is limited by revenue stuck in a $893M-$988M band and thin, low-quality analyst coverage. A reasonable approach is a small starter position with a stop below $142.58, adding only on a confirmed higher low plus two consecutive quarters of gross margin above 30% and revenue above $950M.