For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Bending Spoons S.p.A. (BSP) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-09-11): Designation Low · Gem Score -32 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality -2 · Value -52 · Sentiment -39 (timing only, not weighted)
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Bending Spoons S.p.A.
BSP NASDAQBending Spoons S.p.A. is an Italian technology company focused on acquiring, operating, and improving digital products and platforms. Its portfolio spans software and services used for productivity, communication, content creation, file transfer, event management, video hosting, live streaming, navigation, and AI-powered image and video enhancement. The company manages well-known products such as Evernote, WeTransfer, Vimeo, Eventbrite, StreamYard, Meetup, Komoot, Brightcove, Remini, and AOL, serving consumers, creators, and businesses across global markets. Based in Milan, Bending Spoons plays a distinctive role in the software industry through its long-term ownership model, which centers on product optimization, operational efficiency, and the continued development of digital services that remain embedded in everyday workflows.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
This company does not file structured financial statements with the U.S. SEC, so quarterly figures aren't available from our filings-based data engine. Annual figures shown here come from the sources that do cover it.
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 0.04
Total Equity: $994.86M
Shares: 561,050,000
Total Debt: $2.68B
Cash: $629.94M
EBITDA: $520.29M
Total Debt: $2.68B
Cash: $629.94M
Revenue: $2.61B
Revenue: $2.61B
Revenue: $2.61B
Total Equity: $994.86M
Tax Rate: 85.3%
Equity: $994.86M
Total Debt: $2.68B
Cash: $629.94M
Current Liabilities: $1.12B
Long-Term Debt: $2.26B
Total Debt: $2.68B
Total Equity: $994.86M
Shares: 561,050,000
Shares: 561,050,000
CapEx: $0.00
Shares: 561,050,000
Stock Price: $41.35
Net Income: $22.44M
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Sep 1, 2026 3:00am (36d ago)| Metric | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $671.1M | $2.6B |
| Cost of Revenue | $242.2M | $866.8M |
| Gross Profit | $428.9M | $1.7B |
| Operating Expenses | $301.5M | $1.2B |
| Operating Income | $127.4M | $508.8M |
| Net Income | $89.5M | $22.4M |
| EBITDA | $137.4M | $520.3M |
| EPS | $0.15 | $0.04 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $0.14 | $0.04 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Sep 1, 2026 3:00am (36d ago)| Metric | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $238.7M | $629.9M |
| Total Current Assets | $453.3M | $918.7M |
| Total Assets | $1.9B | $4.8B |
| Current Liabilities | $414.2M | $1.1B |
| Long-Term Debt | $755.8M | $2.3B |
| Total Liabilities | $1.2B | $3.8B |
| Total Equity | $636.2M | $994.9M |
| Retained Earnings | $324.8M | $324.6M |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Sep 1, 2026 3:00am (36d ago)| Metric | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $204.9M | $290.6M |
| Capital Expenditure | — | — |
| Free Cash Flow | $41.8M | $290.0M |
| Acquisitions (net) | -$726.6M | -$1.9B |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $490.9M | $1.7B |
| Dividends Paid | — | — |
| Stock Buybacks | — | — |
| Net Change in Cash | $142.4M | $391.2M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Sep 1, 2026 3:00am (36d ago)| Metric | 2025 |
|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +288.7% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +306.1% |
| Operating Income Growth | +299.5% |
| Net Income Growth | -74.9% |
| EBITDA Growth | +278.5% |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-09-02 02:08Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-09-01 04:29The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.
Claude Reading
The headline number that no model is fully wrestling with is the 289% revenue "growth": that isn't organic — it's the Vimeo/Brightcove/WeTransfer/Komoot acquisition stack landing in the 2025 P&L. Revenue went from $671M to $2.61B in one year while net income *fell* from $89.5M to $22.4M. That is the entire thesis in miniature: you quadruple the top line via debt-funded M&A ($2.68B total debt against $995M equity, D/E 2.69x) and net margin collapses from 13.3% to 0.86%. Operating margin at 19.5% and gross margin at 66.8% look fine for software, but the gap between $509M operating income and $22M net income is roughly $487M of interest, integration charges, and amortization — and that's structural, not one-time, because the acquisition machine has to keep running to justify the multiple. FCF of $290M against a $26.3B market cap is a 1.1% FCF yield. That is not a "high-growth profitable" archetype; the rule-based classifier is wrong, and the pre-flight "conglomerate/roll-up" framing is the correct lens.
The synthesis "Priced for Perfection" and the thesis engine's -13 score are directionally right but I'd push harder. EV/revenue of 10x and EV/EBITDA of 50x for a portfolio of *mature, category-challenged* consumer apps (Evernote losing to Notion/Obsidian, Vimeo structurally shrinking, Eventbrite ex-growth, WeTransfer commoditized by iCloud/Drive) is not a software multiple — it's a growth-SaaS multiple applied to what is functionally a levered specialty-finance vehicle. The narrative layer nails the "European IAC" framing but IAC itself trades at ~1.5x sales. Constellation Software, the *only* roll-up that has actually worked at scale, trades at ~6x sales on vertical B2B software with 90%+ retention — not consumer apps with churn. The bear weight of 82 on "no consumer software rollup has ever worked at scale" is the single most important number in this file and deserves more weight than the RSS aggregation gives it.
The contrarian case I'd steelman: Bending Spoons' actual edge isn't the acquisitions — it's the shared operating platform (pricing, retention ML, cross-sell, unified auth) that they overlay on acquired properties. If that platform genuinely lifts LTV 20-30% on each acquired base, the math on distressed-asset arbitrage does work, and $290M FCF on a growing base could compound to $600-800M within 3 years. At that point 10x EV/rev looks less absurd. But — and this is where I dissent from any charitable read — we have exactly *one* year of consolidated data at this scale, no organic-vs-inorganic disclosure, no cohort retention data, no segment reporting, and a current ratio of 0.82 that says working capital is tight. The absence of quarterly data in this file is not incidental; it's the exact information you'd need to test whether the platform thesis is real or whether margins are being flattered by purchase accounting and deferred integration costs. The Market Forces module failing to render is also a real gap.
I agree with the synthesis verdict but think it's too soft. At $41.35 and $26.3B market cap, you're paying 90x FCF for a levered acquirer whose net income is being eaten alive by the debt stack that generated the revenue in the first place. Fair value on a normalized basis — assume they can sustain $400M FCF within 24 months, apply a 20x multiple appropriate for a levered roll-up with execution risk — gets you to roughly $8B EV, or ~$8-12/share equity value after netting debt. Even generous assumptions ($600M FCF, 25x) get you to $22-25. The path to justifying $41 requires believing they'll compound acquired-base FCF at 25%+ for five years while deleveraging — a combination no consumer software operator has achieved. I'd wait for two clean quarters of organic disclosure and evidence that Vimeo/WeTransfer cohorts are actually re-accelerating under BSP ownership before touching this. The rates environment ("Macro Headwinds" flag) makes the debt-funded model materially worse, not marginally worse.
GPT Reading
The first thing I would throw out is the comforting label of “high-growth profitable.” The revenue line exploded from $671.1M in 2024 to $2.61B in 2025, but net income fell from $89.5M to just $22.4M. That is not a normal software scale story; it is an acquisition story with heavy below-the-line drag. The operating margin is still respectable at 19.5%, and gross margin at 66.8% says these are decent software assets, but the collapse from $508.8M of operating income to only $22.4M of net income means financing costs, amortization, integration charges, or other acquisition-related burdens are swallowing the economics shareholders actually own. On reported numbers, investors are paying 8.9x sales, 10.0x EV/revenue, 50.1x EV/EBITDA, and over 1,000x earnings for a business with 0.9% net margin and 2.3% ROE. That combination is not “misunderstood compounding machine”; it is a stock priced on future deal success rather than current cash earnings.
The balance sheet is where the story gets more fragile. Debt is $2.68B against $629.9M of cash and just $994.9M of equity, with debt/equity at 2.69x and a current ratio below 1 at 0.82. For a serial acquirer, leverage is not automatically a problem if acquired cash flows are stable and integration is routine. But here, the market cap is $26.27B while the latest free cash flow is $290.0M, implying roughly a 90x P/FCF. That can work for an elite organic compounder; it is much harder to defend for a roll-up whose accounting earnings are near zero and whose categories look mature. The crucial contradiction in the bullish framing is that the company is being valued like a premium software platform while its underlying economic engine currently resembles a leveraged portfolio operator. If you want to own a roll-up, you usually demand a discount to reported software multiples, not a premium.
What does stand out positively is that the operating cash flow and free cash flow did hold up at about $291M despite the messy earnings line, and the business did produce $508.8M of operating income on the enlarged revenue base. That suggests the core assets are not junk and that management may indeed be able to buy under-optimized products and improve cost structures quickly. If those operating profits convert more cleanly into net income after acquisition noise fades, today’s headline P/E would be meaningless. But that is the issue: at $41.35, the stock is already asking you to underwrite that normalization as likely, not merely possible. With EV/revenue near 10x, the market is not paying for distressed-asset execution; it is paying for a repeatable, high-confidence platform model. I do not see enough evidence in the current returns metrics—ROIC 2.5%, ROA 0.5%—to grant that confidence.
The best argument against my skepticism is straightforward: 2025 may be a distorted transition year. A smart bull would say the jump from $671.1M to $2.61B shows the acquisition engine is real, gross margin at 66.8% and operating margin near 20% show underlying assets remain monetizable, and free cash flow of $290M proves this is not an accounting mirage. They would also argue that software roll-ups look optically expensive exactly when they are integrating large deals, because purchase accounting and financing costs depress EPS before synergies show up. If net income were to move even halfway toward operating income over the next 12-24 months, today’s 1,034x P/E would collapse and the stock could grow into its valuation quickly. I take that seriously. I just weigh it differently because the market cap already discounts substantial improvement, while the debt load and weak liquidity reduce room for error if acquired franchises deteriorate faster than costs can be cut.
What would change my mind is simple: I need proof that 2025’s earnings collapse was temporary accounting noise rather than the economic reality of the model. Specifically, I would want to see another year of revenue above $2.5B with net income recovering to at least $200M-$250M, free cash flow scaling materially above $400M, and leverage trending down rather than being reloaded for the next deal. Just as important, I would want evidence that operating returns improve—ROIC moving from 2.5% toward high single digits would tell me the acquisition platform creates value instead of just assembling revenue. Without that, a sub-1% net margin company on nearly 9x sales and 90x free cash flow is not cheap ambition; it is expensive faith.
Grok Reading
Bending Spoons is a debt-financed acquisition machine dressed in software clothing, and the 2025 numbers make that unmistakable. Revenue leapt from $671M to $2.61B—a 289% jump that is almost entirely inorganic—while net income collapsed from $89.5M to $22.4M. Operating income of $509M on a 19.5% margin looks respectable until you notice that nearly all of it disappears before the bottom line, leaving a 0.86% net margin and a 1,034x P/E that is not a growth premium so much as a near-zero earnings artifact. Free cash flow of $290M is real and capital-light, but against a $26.3B market cap it yields roughly 1.1%, and that cash is servicing $2.68B of debt against only $630M of cash and a current ratio of 0.82. Returns on capital are abysmal—ROE 2.3%, ROIC 2.5%, ROA 0.5%—which is exactly what you expect when you pay up for mature consumer apps and lever the balance sheet to do it. At 8.9x sales and 50x EV/EBITDA, the stock is pricing a perpetual roll-up compounding machine; the income statement is pricing a company that has not yet proven it can convert acquired revenue into owner earnings.
The story the market wants is European operational excellence unlocking trapped value in Evernote, WeTransfer, Vimeo, Eventbrite and the next wave of unloved digital franchises. What the data actually shows is classic roll-up arithmetic: top-line scale via M&A, decent gross margins (67%) from software economics, and a steep drop-through from operating profit to net income that screams interest, amortization, and integration drag. Earnings CAGR of –75% alongside revenue CAGR of +289% is not a temporary accounting quirk—it is the signature of buying growth with leverage faster than you can earn on it. No scaled consumer-software roll-up has sustained value creation of the kind embedded in a $26B valuation; the assets being acquired were often distressed or slowing for secular reasons (note-taking share loss, video commoditization, event-platform competition), and Italian cost discipline does not rewrite category TAM.
The strongest opposing case is straightforward and deserves weight. Operating margin at 19.5% on a suddenly $2.6B base is not trivial, FCF conversion is essentially 100% of operating cash flow with negligible capex, and if the net-income collapse is dominated by non-cash purchase accounting and one-time financing costs rather than structural cash leakage, run-rate earnings power could re-rate violently once the portfolio stabilizes. A bull can argue the company is early in the platform-leverage innings—centralizing infrastructure, AI features, and monetization across a portfolio that still throws off cash—and that 10x sales is not outrageous for a high-teens operating-margin software compounder if organic trends stabilize and M&A remains disciplined. I weigh this less heavily because the balance sheet already shows stress (D/E 2.69, sub-1 current ratio), ROIC is still near zero after the scale-up year, and the valuation leaves no room for an integration miss or a higher-rate refinancing cycle. The optionality is real; the price of that optionality is not.
I would flip toward constructive if 2026 delivers net margins climbing back toward double digits with FCF holding above $400M, if net debt/EBITDA compresses meaningfully without equity issuance, and if management discloses organic growth in the major acquired franchises that is stable-to-positive rather than harvest-mode decline. A clean large acquisition at a clearly accretive cash multiple, followed by visible margin expansion in that asset within four quarters, would also force a reassessment. Until then, $41 is a price that assumes the playbook works every time.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Bending Spoons shows an explosive revenue jump from $671M to $2.61B year-over-year with gross margin expanding to 66.8% and operating margin holding at ~19.5%. Free cash flow leapt from $42M to $290M and OCF/NI of 7.62x plus accruals of -5.9% of assets point to genuine cash earnings well in excess of GAAP net income ($22.4M). Altman Z of 5.13 sits in the safe zone and SBC is a modest 2.1% of revenue, while diluted share count fell 11.6% — genuine per-share concentration rather than dilution.
Verify before trusting this (6)
- Debt maturity schedule, covenants, and cost of the $2.05B net debt
- Organic vs acquired revenue split in the $671M to $2.61B jump (Evernote, WeTransfer, Komoot, Brightcove etc.)
- Reconciliation of $22.4M net income to $290M FCF — magnitude of acquisition-related amortization and one-time items
- Drivers of the Beneish flag: DSO trend, gross margin sustainability post-acquisitions, asset quality index
- Customer/product concentration across the acquired portfolio and churn trends in legacy apps
- Whether buyback funding is coming from FCF or incremental debt
The e2e synthesis pegs this as a serial acquirer priced for continued flawless capital deployment - a valuation that leans heavily on extrapolating Constellation-like returns from a company with roughly two years of visible operating data and about $2B of net debt funding the strategy. A $26.3B market cap on a portfolio of mature, decelerating SaaS assets (Evernote, WeTransfer, Vimeo, Eventbrite) implies the market is capitalizing not just the current cash flows but a long tail of successful future deals. That is a heroic assumption to embed in today's price. Earnings quality is high, which supports the deserved value, and the FCF conversion profile is genuinely impressive - both push deserved value up. But the Beneish flag, the leverage, and the reliance on premium multiples paid for slowing franchises argue for a discount, not a premium, to a clean DCF. Netting it, deserved value sits modestly below $41.35 - call it low-to-mid $30s - with the market already paying for the optionality on future acquisitions. It's not egregious, but there is no margin of safety here.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Organic vs acquired revenue growth by segment
- Post-acquisition retention/churn at Evernote, WeTransfer, Vimeo
- Incremental deal IRRs and payback assumptions in management commentary
- Debt maturity schedule and covenant headroom
- Working-capital and deferred-revenue movements underlying the Beneish flag
The macro tape is mildly supportive (VIX ~15, risk-on +26) but rates at 4.73% and a 25.8x market PE lean on any leveraged, acquisitive software story - and BSP is exactly that profile. The platform-monopoly / European-roll-up narrative is intense and moderately durable, which normally gives a name like this an outsized tailwind versus the sector. The problem is the story is not converting: a 16.6% single-day drop on a Q2 beat says the market is punishing guidance/outlook, not fundamentals, and that is a classic sign the narrative is running ahead of what management is willing to promise. Layer on D/E climbing from 1.37 to 2.69 and you have a market that increasingly wants to see deleveraging or organic acceleration before re-rating. Analyst tone and news flow are thin (insufficient_data on both recent moves), so price action is the tell - and price action is schizophrenic (+39.7% one session, -16.6% another), which reads as low-float, narrative-driven trading rather than institutional accumulation. Net: the roll-up story still supports the name, but the post-print reaction and leverage optics cancel most of that tailwind.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- What specifically in the Q2 print (guidance? organic growth? margin outlook?) drove the 16.6% drop - that is the crack in the narrative
- Whether management addresses the D/E jump with a deleveraging plan or another accretive deal
- Any sell-side initiations or target revisions post-Q2 - silence would itself be bearish
- Organic growth disclosure at Evernote / WeTransfer / Vimeo - the narrative lives or dies on this
The world is producing an unusual supply of orphaned web-era digital assets — profitable, widely used, under-invested — as their original owners rotate capital to AI. Bending Spoons is a buyer of that supply, and a centralized operating platform plus AI feature tooling (Remini-style enhancement, automated support and marketing) genuinely lowers the cost of running each product. The same AI wave is also the sharpest threat: note-taking, file transfer and video encoding are exactly the utility layers most exposed to being absorbed into general-purpose assistants and platform defaults. The durable edge is therefore operational and financial (cost of ownership, cash conversion), not product moat.
When we made this prediction on Sep 1, 2026, BSP was $40.71. We expect it to be $33.50 by Mar 2027, and we consider it great value under $33.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Sep 1, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.