higher

American Express (AXP 0.70%) is a global payments company with a different model from the card networks most investors know. Unlike Visa and Mastercard, which mainly run transaction networks and avoid lending, American Express issues cards, extends credit, and earns meaningful fee income from premium customers. That difference mattered on Friday, when shares jumped after the company posted strong third-quarter results and lifted its full-year outlook.

Is this move noise or the start of a repricing toward peer-like valuations? I think the latter. With spending and fee income looking good and credit holding steady, it wouldn’t be surprising to see the stock’s valuation multiple expand significantly over time, catching up with the valuation multiples of Visa and Mastercard.

Image source: Getty Images.

Impressive results

It wasn’t surprising to see shares jump following the release of the company’s latest financial results. Third-quarter revenue rose 11% year over year to $18.4 billion, and earnings per share increased 19% to $4.14. Card member spend growth accelerated to 9% (up from 7% growth in Q2). Management also raised full-year guidance, saying it expects 9% to 10% revenue growth and earnings per share of $15.20 to $15.50.

Driving the quarter, the company’s cardmember fee income climbed 18% year over year as more customers adopted its premium cards, which offer travel and lifestyle perks in exchange for annual fees. Additionally, net interest income rose 12%.

Credit metrics look good, too. American Express’s provision for credit losses declined year over year on a lower reserve build. And the company’s net write-off rate held at 1.9%, flat from a year ago and from the prior quarter. For a credit card issuer that keeps credit risk on its own balance sheet, steady write-offs and a lighter reserve build point to disciplined underwriting even as spend grows rapidly.

What makes American Express different

Of course, American Express doesn’t differentiate itself from Visa and Mastercard just by extending credit and charging substantial card fees across its flagship products. The company’s value proposition in the premium space is perhaps the company’s greatest edge. This is fresh on investors’ minds because American Express recently refreshed its U.S. consumer and business Platinum products — and it’s working; new U.S. Platinum account acquisitions in the three weeks following the refresh doubled versus pre-refresh levels, management said in its third-quarter update. Considering that the refresh came with a substantially higher annual fee, that kind of customer response suggests pricing power with the customers who spend the most, use travel benefits, and stay loyal.

Driving home just how premium American Express’s cardmembers are, they spend an average of three times more on their cards than the average spend per card on other networks.

Valuation still trails far behind Visa and Mastercard

Even after the rally, American Express trades at a lower price-to-earnings multiple than the pure networks Visa and Mastercard. The two peers earn higher valuations for their capital-light models, which carry less credit risk and produce steady cash flow. That premium makes sense.

Depending on how you look at it, however, there are also reasons that American Express may deserve a premium. Visa and Mastercard may take on less risk, but American Express participates in more of the profit pool per dollar of spend and has more control over the customer’s overall experience — an advantage that is likely key to helping the company cater to higher spenders.

Ultimately, if American Express can show that its approach is leading to a better customer experience, including higher engagement and greater lifetime customer spend while maintaining good credit metrics, investors may be willing to narrow the gap between American Express’s valuation multiple and its pure network peers.

Of course, being an integrated payments company requires carefully balancing underwriting and incentives to bolster cardmember spending. A surprise rise in delinquencies would pressure earnings. Likewise, a slowdown in the macroeconomic environment could hit discount revenue, customer acquisition trends, and even lending. These factors could keep the valuation discount in place longer than bulls expect.

Still, there’s a lot to like — especially given the stock’s fair price-to-earnings multiple of about 23. This compares to Visa and Mastercard’s price-to-earnings ratios of 34 and 38, respectively. With strong financials in the context of its valuation, American Express stock looks compelling. Revenue is growing at double-digit rates, spend is accelerating, and fee income tied to its premium cards is doing the heavy lifting. Management’s playbook of regularly refreshing its products and deepening engagement while broadening acceptance shows up in the numbers and in guidance.

If American Express’s momentum persists, a narrower valuation gap with Visa and Mastercard makes sense. Friday’s surge looks less like a spike and more like the start of a reset in how investors price this franchise. After years of consistent growth and strong credit metrics, investors might start seeing the company’s integrated payment model as a key competitive advantage worthy of a significantly higher premium.

Satellite telephony company Viasat (VSAT -1.30%) had quite a memorable week as far as its stock went. Driven by broad investor optimism on space-related titles generally and recent positive company-specific news items, it booked a near-double-digit gain over the period. According to data compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence, Viasat’s share price rose in excess of 9% across the week.

Viable Viasat

What also helped was a live demonstration of its capabilities. On Thursday in Mexico City, Viasat put its direct-to-device satellite service through its paces.

Image source: Getty Images.

During the demonstration, Viasat sent text messages between two Android smartphones, one of which was linked to its satellite network and one through a traditional cellular matrix. It also flexed its satellite-powered services through a different device, the HMD Offgrid.

In the press release detailing the demonstration, the company quoted its general manager of Viasat Mexico Hector Rivero as saying that “This technology has the ability to bridge the connectivity gap in areas where traditional services are unreliable or non-existent, opening up possibilities for millions of individuals and devices to connect through satellite.”

“We are confident that this will have significant advantages for consumers and various industries worldwide,” he added.

Major contract in force

Viasat’s services seem to be striking a chord with major institutional customers, at least. Earlier this month, the company announced, no doubt happily, that it had earned a prime contract award from the U.S. Space Force. This will see it contribute to a dedicated satellite network for that branch of the American military.

A second analyst price target raise in nearly as many trading days was the catalyst igniting the stock of Murphy Oil (MUR 7.51%) on Monday. Bullish investors traded the company’s shares up by almost 8% on the day in response, a rate that trounced the 1.6% increase of the S&P 500 (^GSPC 1.56%).

A raiser and holder

Monday’s raiser was Roger Read from top U.S. bank Wells Fargo. Well before market open, Read changed his Murphy Oil price target to $28 per share from $26.

Image source: Getty Images.

He remains cautious on the stock, however, as he maintained his equal weight (hold, in other words) recommendation on it.

According to reports, Read wrote in his update that the company is expecting to deliver impressive operational and financial results for its third quarter (it’s scheduled to unveil those numbers on Oct. 30). The analyst expressed some concern about certain areas, such as the company’s 2026 guidance.

Industrywide adjustments

Previous to that, last Thursday, Bank of Nova Scotia also enacted a price target raise while maintaining its equivalent of a hold recommendation. The Canadian lender increased its fair-value assessment on Murphy Oil to $30 per share from $26, as part of a broader set of price target adjustments to U.S. oil stocks.

Energy Fuels (UUUU 17.87%) stock, involved in mining both uranium and rare-earth metals, soared 18% through 10:35 a.m. ET Monday after China threatened to throttle rare-earth exports to the United States.

President Donald Trump reassured investors that China isn’t serious, and everything “will all be fine.” Not everyone seems 100% convinced, however, and shares of pretty much every stock having anything to do with rare-earth materials — Energy Fuels included — is rising on elevated risk to the supply chain.

Image source: Getty Images.

Bad news for US is good news for UUUU

London’s Financial Times reports that the U.S. Defense Department will build a $1 billion stockpile of critical minerals to ensure supply chain continuity for defense systems.

Jamie Dimon, CEO of investment bank JPMorgan Chase (JPM 2.36%), is adding fuel to the fire. He commented that it is “painfully clear that the United States has allowed itself to become too reliant on unreliable sources of critical minerals, products and manufacturing — all of which are essential for our national security,” and the JPM CEO says his bank plans to invest $10 billion, in loans and direct investments, over the next decade, to support several critical sectors: defense and aerospace, artificial intelligence and quantum computing, energy technology, and supply chain and advanced manufacturing.

Is Energy Fuels stock a buy?

Dimon’s prediction aligns well with news last week that Energy Fuels is raising $700 million in convertible debt. Even with $115 million in annual cash burn, Energy Fuels’ move last week gives the company six extra years to grow its rare-earth and uranium businesses and reach profitability.

Valued at more than 200 times next year’s earnings, Energy Fuels isn’t a buy just yet, but the picture is at least getting clearer.

THE chancellor could raise tens of billions from tax reforms that don’t hit “working people”, leading economists have said.

Rachel Reeves is under pressure to fill an estimated £50billion black hole in the public finances ahead of November’s autumn statement. 

1

Westminster is awash with rumours that Labour could extend the freeze on income tax thresholds.

However, critics say this would mean breaking Labour’s manifesto pledge not to increase taxes on “working people”.

But in a new report, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) urged the Chancellor to resist “half-baked” solutions like “simply hiking rates”. 

The IFS Green Budget Chapter report instead urges the chancellor to reform the “unfair” and “inefficient” tax system.

End capital gains tax relief on death

Reeves could scrap capital gains tax relief on death, the report said.

When you sell certain assets – like houses, land or other valuable items – you have to pay a tax on the profit you made on it.

However, there are some important exceptions.

For example, if someone dies and you inherit their asset, you don’t have to pay capital gains tax they would have paid.

But the IFS said Reeves should consider scrapping the relief, raising £2.3billion in 2029-30.

However, families could oppose the measure given Labour is already skimming more revenue off inherited wealth.

The inheritance tax threshold has been frozen at £325,000 since 2009.

And last year, Reeves announced she would extend the freeze until 2030.

Hit taxpayers with a ‘one-off’ wealth tax

Economists and politicians are often divided over whether a wealth tax would work.

Supporters argue that the UK’s richest 1% are wealthier than the bottom 70% – and that a wealth tax would reduce this inequality.

But critics say it would be an administrative nightmare and lead millionaires to leave the country, taking their businesses and tax revenues with them.

But if Labour does reach for wealth in the budget – it should opt for a “one-off” wealth tax, the IFS said.

The think tank argues this is a better option than a recurring wealth tax.

It would work by the government calculating how much people’s total assets are worth and taxing them over a certain threshold.

“An unexpected and credibly one-off assessment of existing wealth could in principle be an economically efficient way to raise revenue,” the IFS wrote.

However, a wealth tax that happened on a regular basis would have “serious drawbacks,” the think tank warned.

Valuing everyone’s wealth every year would be “extremely difficult,” it said.

Moreover, a regular tax could deter the highest tax payers from residing in the UK long-term, potentially hitting overall tax revenues.

But the IFS said that even a “one-off” levy could spell trouble if people don’t trust the government not to come back for more.

The report said: “The potential efficiency of such a tax could be
undermined, however, if announcing a one-off tax created expectations of, or uncertainty about, other future taxes.”

Double the council tax rates paid by highest value homes

A new council tax surcharge could raise up to £4.4billion.

Council tax is a local tax on residential properties in the UK, with homes assigned to Bands A to H based on their value.

Bands G and H generally include the highest value homes.

The IFS said doubling the council tax paid by these households could mean a £4.4billion boost.

However, critics already say the council tax system is “unfair and arbitrary”.

As reported by The Sun, families living in modest homes sometimes pay more than those in multi-million-pound mansions.

The root of the problem is simple – council tax bills are not based on what your home is worth today.

Instead, it’s based on its value way back in 1991, when homes were categorised into bands ranging from A to H. 

Decades of uneven house price growth mean this once-simple system is now riddled with inequalities.

Moreover, councils set their own tax rates – leading to a “postcode lottery”.

The average Band D council tax in England is £2,280, but councils set their own rates.

For example, in Wandsworth, people pay just £990, while in Nottingham, they pay £2,656.

This means that millions of homeowners pay much less compared to their property’s value than those in poorer areas, according to PropertyData.

Another potential problem is that the extra cash would go to local authorities rather than central government.

Local authorities use council tax to pay for local services like schools, bin collections and libraries.

So to make sure it reaps the benefits of the change, Downing Street could reduce the grants being paid to councils, the IFS said.

The UK government gives councils more than £69billion in funding – a 6.8% increase in cash terms compared to 2024-25.

But councils would likely still fight back against any funding downgrade – with sticky 3.8% inflation already eating into their grants.

Rejig inheritance tax

The IFS admits that changes to inheritance tax could ‘provoke’ strong reactions.

But its report said that the £9billion said annually is ‘modest’ – although high by historical standards.

Reforming death duties to abolish the additional £175,000 tax-free allowance could raise around £6billion, the economists wrote.

“One obvious option would be to increase the rate of inheritance tax from its current 40%,” the economists wrote.

They said an increase of just 1% would raise £0.3billion in 2029–30.

The government could also reduce the threshold at which the tax begins to be paid.

Currently, people can pass on up to £325,000 of wealth tax-free.

Then there’s an additional £175,000 tax-free allowance that can be used only when passing on a primary residence to a direct descendant.

Abolishing the second of these allowances, for example, could raise around £6billion in 2029–30, the IFS said.

Crack down on businesses underpaying their taxes

The think tank has urged Labour to tackle tax non-compliance.

Corporation tax, a tax on company profits, has become increasingly important to the Treasury’s coffers in recent years.

Over the course of the 2010s, revenue averaged 2.4% of national income, rising to 3.3% in 2025–26.

But corporation tax dodging meant 15.8% of liabilities went unpaid in 2023-24, up from just 8.8% in 2017-18.

Small businesses are mainly to blame, the IFS said, admitting that claiming the prize of missing corporation tax “would not be straightforward in practice”.

The think tank added: “More work is needed to understand why so many small companies are submitting incorrect tax returns.

“It is likely that tackling the gap would require targeted
compliance activities from HMRC, such as auditing small businesses.”

The IFS also said “more revenue could be raised from corporation tax”.

However, it did warn that, while a 1% increase would raise £4.1billion, there could be adverse consequences.

The authors wrote that investment in the UK could become “less attractive” and reduce future tax yields.

However, critics may argue that any tax hike hitting members of the public – even if targeting inheritance or council tax – will still feel like a broken promise.

What must the chancellor avoid doing?

The personal tax allowance has been frozen at £12,570 since April 2021.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced the freeze would remain until April 2026 and Labour extended it until April 2028.

Extending the freeze on personal tax thresholds including national insurance contributions would raise around £10.4billion a year from 2029-30.

But IFS economists say Reeves must not do this – and instead lift the threshold amid rising inflation.

Extending the freeze would be a breach of Labour’s manifesto pledge not to increase taxes for “working people” which includes income tax, national insurance and VAT, the IFS said.

The report’s authors also said restricting income tax relief on pension contributions would raise large sums but should be avoided.

Currently, when you put money into a pension, the income tax you’ve already paid on that money is essentially returned via a government top-up.

The IFS said restricting relief would be “unfair” to penalise pensions again when pension income is already taxed.

The Chancellor should also resist the temptation to up stamp duties, the IFS said.

The think tank fears it would cause people to avoid selling their homes when they want to – hitting the jobs market and holding back growth.

“Changing rates and thresholds is all very well, but unless the Chancellor is willing to pursue genuine reform it will be taxpayers that shoulder the cost of her neglect,” the report, which forms a chapter in the IFS’s wider budget assessment for 2025, said.

Isaac Delestre, a senior research economist at the think tank and an author of the chapter, said Ms Reeves would have “fallen short” if she reaches for quick revenue without wider reform.

“Almost any package of tax rises is likely to weigh on growth, but by tackling some of the inefficiency and unfairness in our existing tax system, the Chancellor could limit the economic damage,” he said.