Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
FRESH Analysis Report
Aug 12, 2026
1 day ago · 100% complete
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM) — 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 2026-08-14): Designation Gem · Cairn score +35 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 48 · Value 24 · Sentiment 0 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $140.79 vs $120.69 at analysis

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 cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-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.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

CM NYSE
Financial Services · Banks - Diversified
Toronto, ON M5J 0E7, Canada cibc.com Updated Aug 12, 1:04pm
Price
$120.66
Market Cap
$108.6B
Employees
50,648
Beta
1.28
Avg Volume
1,106,325
Last Dividend
$2.92
CEO
Mr. Harry K. Culham

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce is a leading Canadian financial institution offering comprehensive banking and wealth management services. It operates through four primary business segments: Canadian Personal and Small Business Banking, which delivers financial advice, products, and services to personal and business clients; Canadian Commercial Banking and Wealth Management, providing relationship-oriented banking and wealth solutions; U.S. Commercial Banking and Wealth Management, offering similar services to clients in the United States; and Capital Markets, which supplies integrated global markets products, investment banking advisory, corporate banking, and research to corporate, government, and institutional clients worldwide. The bank serves approximately 14 million personal banking and business customers, primarily in Canada and the U.S., with a focus on retail, commercial, and institutional sectors. Founded in 1961 and headquartered in Toronto, Ontario, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce plays a significant role in North American financial markets as one of Canada's major banks.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 8, 2026 12:15am
Earnings Schedule
Checked daily · calendar updated Aug 14
No upcoming print on the calendar yet — companies typically confirm a few weeks ahead. Last print was May 28, 2026.
EPS surprise history — vs analyst consensus · 4 prints of vendor history
+16.1%
Jan '26
-4.8%
Feb '26
-150.0%
Mar '26
+3.7%
May '26
Print date EPS est. EPS actual Revenue est. Revenue actual
May 28, 2026 $2.45 $2.54 +3.7%
Mar 24, 2026 $-0.40 $-1.00 -150.0%
Feb 23, 2026 $0.42 $0.40 -4.8%
Jan 23, 2026 $1.61 $1.87 +16.1%

Green = beat the estimate, red = missed. An earnings print is the fastest way a thesis changes — our designations should be re-read after each one.

Recent SEC Filings
Filed Form Document
Aug 13, 2026 SCHEDULE 13G View
Aug 13, 2026 SCHEDULE 13G View
Aug 13, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 13, 2026 FWP View
Aug 13, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 12, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 12, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 11, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 11, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 10, 2026 424B2 View
Aug 4, 2026 FWP View
Aug 4, 2026 FWP View

Filings link to the SEC’s EDGAR system. Annual/quarterly reports (10-K, 10-Q, 20-F) carry the full story; 8-K/6-K current reports are the fastest signal that something material happened.

Price Overview
Price at report time
$120.69
as of Aug 12, 1:22pm (1d ago)
Change · Aug 12
+1.73 (+1.45%)
Day Range
$119.47 – $120.92
52-Week Range
$72.58 – $122.50
50-Day MA
$115.57
200-Day MA
$101.44
Volume
5,206.00
Right now · live
loading…
 
Real-time — the change above is the move since the report (over 1d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 914,772,714.00
Float 902,276,919.00
Free Float 98.6%
High free float — 98.6% of shares trade freely, ~1.4% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 1:24pm (1d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 1:05pm (1d ago)
Why there are no quarterly figures for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce is a foreign private issuer — it reports to the U.S. SEC once a year (on Form 20-F or 40-F) rather than filing the quarterly statements (10-Q) that U.S.-domiciled companies must submit. Our financial statements are read directly from SEC filings, so for this company only annual figures exist at the source.

This is a property of how the company files, not missing or broken data — its filing history shows 8 annual reports, the latest filed 2025-12-04, and no quarterly filings . The company may still publish quarterly results on its own investor-relations site.

Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 12, 2026 1:17pm
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
19.59
Stock Price: $120.66
EPS (Diluted): 6.16
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
2.59
Stock Price: $120.66
Total Equity: $45.77B
Shares: 983,547,258
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
Market Cap: $108.59B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $8.80B
EBITDA: N/A
EBITDA not available
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$104.1B
Market Cap: $108.59B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $8.80B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
Gross Profit: N/A
Revenue: $20.94B
Missing from API: Gross Profit
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
Operating Income: N/A
Revenue: $20.94B
Missing from API: Operating Income
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
28.9%
Net Income: $6.06B
Revenue: $20.94B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
13.2%
Net Income: $6.06B
Total Equity: $45.77B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
Operating Income: N/A
Tax Rate: 22.7%
Equity: $45.77B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $8.80B
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
Current Assets: N/A
Current Liabilities: N/A
Missing from API: Current Assets, Current Liabilities
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $45.77B
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$21.29
Revenue: $20.94B
Shares: 983,547,258
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$46.54
Total Equity: $45.77B
Shares: 983,547,258
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$10.00
Operating CF: $9.83B
CapEx: $0.00
Shares: 983,547,258
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
2.4%
Last Dividend: $2.92
Stock Price: $120.66
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $6.06B
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 12, 2026 1:17pm
Compares CM against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 1:05pm (1d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $14.4B $15.7B $16.8B $18.4B $20.9B
Cost of Revenue
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses $4.8B $5.4B $5.6B $4.5B $6.9B
Operating Income
Net Income $4.6B $4.5B $3.6B $5.1B $6.1B
EBITDA
EPS $5.02 $4.82 $3.72 $5.24 $6.20
EPS (Diluted) $5.00 $4.80 $3.72 $5.23 $6.16
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 5, 2026 9:45am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $24.6B $22.4B $14.8B $6.1B $8.8B
Total Current Assets
Total Assets $595.2B $670.5B $693.3B $740.4B $793.7B
Current Liabilities
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $562.7B $634.7B $655.5B $698.5B $747.9B
Total Equity $32.6B $35.8B $37.8B $41.9B $45.8B
Retained Earnings $18.3B $20.5B $21.6B $23.8B $25.9B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 5, 2026 9:45am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow -$2.4B $16.1B $8.6B $7.9B $9.8B
Capital Expenditure
Free Cash Flow
Acquisitions (net) -$2.2B
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid)
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks
Net Change in Cash -$6.4B -$2.2B -$7.6B -$8.7B $2.7B
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 1:05pm (1d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +9.1% +6.8% +9.8% +13.8%
Gross Profit Growth
Operating Income Growth
Net Income Growth -3.3% -19.7% +42.4% +18.5%
EBITDA Growth
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 1:05pm (1d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-06-29 $0.75
2026-03-27 $0.77
2025-06-27 $0.71
2025-03-28 $0.68
2024-12-27 $0.67
2024-09-27 $0.67
2024-06-28 $0.66
2024-03-27 $0.66
2023-12-27 $0.68
2023-09-27 $0.64
2023-06-27 $0.66
2023-03-27 $0.62
2022-12-23 $0.62
2022-09-27 $0.60
2022-06-27 $0.64
2022-03-25 $0.32
2021-09-27 $0.29
2021-06-25 $0.30
2021-03-26 $0.29
2020-12-24 $0.28
Deep Analysis
Last run: Aug 14, 2026 1:17:13 am

Pre-flight intelligence scans the company first, then routes to the right analytical methods.

0 Company Classification — What type of company is this?
1 Industry Landscape — Where is the industry headed?
2 Company Momentum — Where is this company trending?
3 Forward Projection — 1Y & 2Y projected metrics (requires Layer 1 + 2)
4a DCF Valuation — Present value of future cash flows
4b Earnings Power Value — Floor value — worth with zero growth
4c Anchored PE — Industry PE adjusted for growth differential
4d Reverse DCF — What growth is the market pricing in?
4e Revenue-Based DCF — For growth/narrative companies (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4f Anchored P/S — Price-to-Sales peer comparison (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4g Scenario Analysis — Bull / Base / Bear (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4h Dividend Discount Model — For dividend/income stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4i Book Value Analysis — For deep value / turnaround stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4j Insider Activity — Are insiders buying or selling?
4f Cash Flow Quality — How trustworthy is the FCF?
4g Debt Maturity Risk — Can it handle its debt?
4h Macro Environment — Rates, market valuation, volatility
4i Sector Intelligence — How does this company compare within its sector?
4j Revenue Confidence — How reliable is the growth projection?
4k Sensitivity Analysis — How fragile is the fair value estimate?
4l Sector Demand Cycle — Is the sector in a boom, steady state, or contraction?
5 AI Investigation — Adaptive research engine (Claude)
5b Thesis Evaluation — What does the market believe? (narrative/platform stocks only)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
6 Valuation Synthesis — Weighted verdict from all methods (requires Layer 4)
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for CM — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-12
The creme is there an opportunity here? Conditional opportunity
Buy the charter, not the software story: AI is a fairly reliable cost tailwind for CIBC, and the only thing that turns it negative is agentic deposit-shopping eating the spread before the savings land.
Position 58 with a 35–75 range: the balance sheet is AI-proof, the expense base is AI-addressable, and the real bet is on ai_margin_conversion (61) beating ai_intermediation_position (45). The unlock is a visible, sustained efficiency-ratio improvement in Canadian P&SB without a matching step-up in personal deposit beta; the killer is Canada's open-banking framework going live alongside capable agents, which converts a sticky primary-chequing franchise into a rate-shopped commodity. Watch renewal retention and deposit beta quarterly — those move before any AI narrative does.
58
AI Position
Mildly favorable — charter shields the franchise, agents threaten the deposit spread
AI mostly attacks CIBC's cost base (a large, addressable one) while the regulated charter, insured deposits and payment rails stay hard to reproduce — but the same technology makes retail deposits and mortgages easier to shop, which is where the profit actually lives.
Exposure 54 Confidence 67 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

CIBC's economics run through a very large non-interest expense line — contact centres, branch service, back-office adjudication, AML/KYC review, and capital-markets middle office — all of which are language-and-document work that cheap inference can compress without touching the balance sheet that generates the revenue.

Primary Pressure

Canadian retail profitability rests on inert deposits and low-friction mortgage renewal; AI agents plus Canada's consumer-driven banking framework make rate-shopping and switching a background task, raising deposit betas and pushing mortgage spreads toward broker-market pricing.

Critical Hinge

Whether AI-driven comparison and agentic switching materially lifts deposit costs and renewal churn before expense savings show up. Watch the deposit beta on personal chequing/savings, renewal retention rates, and the efficiency ratio in Canadian P&SB quarter over quarter.

Hard to Reproduce

An OSFI charter with CDIC-insured funding, decades of primary-chequing relationships and payroll direct-deposit anchoring, Payments Canada rail access, and a capital base regulators supervise — none of which cheaper software creates.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 94
Deposits, credit, payments and capital intermediation do not go away because inference is cheap.
The need CIBC serves is safekeeping, credit extension and settlement — functions defined by law, insurance and capital, not by software capability.
Canadian deposit market growth · Household credit demand trend · Payments volume through Payments Canada
relevance 58 · confidence 90
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 71
The chartered-bank form persists; the branch-and-advisor delivery form keeps shrinking.
AI accelerates the shift of service and advice to digital self-serve, which is cost-positive but weakens the relationship anchoring that historically held Canadian primary-bank share.
Branch count and transaction mix · Digitally active client share · Advisor headcount per AUM
relevance 62 · confidence 72
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 54
Cheap AI powers CIBC's back office but equally arms non-bank mortgage and lending challengers.
Underwriting, servicing and compliance software costs fall for everyone; the differentiator reverts to funding cost and capital, where CIBC is advantaged, but narrow-slice competitors get cheaper to launch.
Non-bank lender share of originations · Fintech deposit-adjacent product launches · Cost per loan adjudicated
relevance 70 · confidence 66
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 79
Customers pay CIBC to carry credit, custody, fraud and AML liability — an unattractive thing to internalize.
Deposit insurance, fraud reimbursement, AML obligations and regulatory capital are liabilities no customer or AI vendor wants to own, and AI makes the compliance workload cheaper to discharge rather than unnecessary.
AML/compliance spend per revenue · Fraud losses and reimbursement policy · OSFI capital and model-risk guidance
relevance 72 · confidence 78
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 68
Software and analysis become abundant; charters, insured funding and capital become relatively scarcer.
As the informational layer commoditizes, the residual scarce inputs are the licence, the deposit base and the ability to hold risk — all of which CIBC owns and none of which an AI-native can conjure.
Core deposit growth vs. term funding · CET1 trajectory · New Canadian bank licence approvals
relevance 75 · confidence 70
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 76
No customer builds a bank; some will self-direct investing and treasury with AI help.
Retail and commercial clients cannot internalize regulated deposit-taking, but AI-assisted self-directed investing and corporate treasury tooling can pull fee revenue away from advised channels.
Self-directed vs. advised asset mix · Commercial treasury fee revenue · Wealth net flows by channel
relevance 55 · confidence 74
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 45
Payment rails run through CIBC, but agentic rate-shopping and open banking put a comparison layer in front of it.
Consumer-driven banking plus capable agents let a third party hold the relationship and route deposits and mortgages to the best price, converting CIBC from primary relationship to interchangeable balance-sheet supplier in the affected slices.
Canadian open-banking rollout timing · Primary chequing account retention · Mortgage renewal retention rate
relevance 78 · confidence 58
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 60
Rich transaction and credit data improves risk models, but every Big Six peer holds a comparable set.
CIBC's data is genuinely useful for PCL, fraud and cross-sell modelling, yet it is not scarce relative to peers and Canadian privacy plus open-banking rules push toward portability rather than exclusivity.
PCL ratio vs. Big Six peers · Fraud detection loss rates · Data-portability rule scope
relevance 58 · confidence 60
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 61
A large expense base offers real efficiency-ratio headroom; oligopoly competition returns some of it to customers.
With non-interest expense a dominant cost line, single-digit headcount and process savings are material to EPS, but with five domestic peers running the same playbook a portion reinvests into pricing and technology spend.
Efficiency ratio trend by segment · Headcount vs. revenue growth · Technology spend as % of expense
relevance 82 · confidence 63
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 56
Net interest income survives; advice fees and transaction-linked fees are the compressible units.
The spread on a mortgage or deposit is a balance-sheet unit AI cannot delete, but wealth advisory basis points and certain service fees are exactly the units cheap competent AI advice argues down.
Wealth fee rate on AUM · Deposit beta on personal accounts · Non-interest income mix shift
relevance 76 · confidence 62
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 63
Capital and licensing barriers survive cheap software; narrow-product entrants get materially cheaper to launch.
Nobody stands up an OSFI-regulated deposit franchise with a model, but AI collapses the cost of building an origination, servicing or advice layer that skims CIBC's highest-margin slices.
New entrant origination share · Partnership vs. competition with fintechs · Deposit-gathering by non-banks
relevance 68 · confidence 69

AI Lens thesis

CIBC is not an information business that AI can substitute; it is a licensed balance sheet wrapped in an information business. Cheap intelligence hits the wrapper: service, adjudication, compliance review, advisory documentation, trade support — plausibly several hundred basis points of efficiency ratio over five years, and CIBC starts with less peer-relative efficiency headroom to give away than it once had. The balance sheet itself is untouched: credit risk, capital and deposit insurance remain scarce and regulated. The genuine AI transmission risk is not disintermediation of the bank but disintermediation of customer inertia — the Big Six earn an oligopoly spread partly because switching is annoying, and agentic finance is a machine for making annoyance free. Net: cost tailwind is fairly reliable, revenue-side erosion is slower but structural, and the Canadian oligopoly means savings get partly competed into pricing.

Thesis breaker If Canadian personal deposit costs step up materially without a matching loan-yield move — or if efficiency ratio fails to improve at all by 2027 despite AI spend — the favorable read is wrong in whichever direction moves first.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside Credit adjudication and collections done with far richer, faster models can lower provisions through a cycle; a persistent few basis points off PCL ratios is worth more to CIBC's earnings than most of the headcount savings being discussed.

Downside Wealth management advice fees are the softest revenue unit — as AI-generated planning becomes adequate and visible, the ~1% managed-money fee on mass-affluent books is the first price to be argued down, and it is high-margin revenue CIBC has been leaning into.

Outcome range spread 40

35Bear case
57Central case
75Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-12 13:22:41
Verdict Overvalued on peak-cycle earnings extrapolation — fair value $100–110, not $148; hold if owned for the dividend, don't initiate here, revisit if PCLs normalize and stock trades sub-$105.

Starting from the raw numbers: CIBC compounded revenue from $14.4B (FY21) to $20.9B (FY25), a 9.8% CAGR, with net income going $4.62B → $4.47B → $3.59B → $5.11B → $6.06B. That 2023 trough is the tell — this is a bank whose earnings visibly flexed with the credit cycle (PCLs spiked during Canadian housing stress), and the "29.9% earnings CAGR" the momentum module cites is largely a trough-to-peak artifact off FY23. Normalizing through the cycle, sustainable earnings are probably closer to $5.2–5.5B, not $6.1B. ROE of 13.2% is fine but unspectacular for a Canadian Big Six — RY runs ~15–16%, and that's the gap the P/B discount (2.59x vs RY's ~2.0x, actually — the pre-flight has this backwards; CM historically trades at a discount to RY, not RY at 3.0x+) reflects. ROA of 0.76% is standard bank optics and not informative.

On valuation: 19.6x trailing P/E on what looks like peak-cycle earnings is not cheap for a Canadian bank. Historical CM multiple is 10–12x through-cycle; even generous is 13x. Apply 13x to $5.4B normalized earnings and you get ~$78B equity value, or roughly $87/share — materially below the $120.66 spot. The synthesis composite fair value of $140.93 appears to be extrapolating the FY24→FY25 earnings surge as run-rate, which is exactly the trap Market Forces flags. I side with Market Forces here over Synthesis: the DCF-implied "18.5% discount" narrative is anchoring on a peaky NIM environment and abnormally low PCLs. Canadian bank NIMs peaked in 2H24; BoC cuts in 2025 and mortgage renewal shock in 2025–26 (the $200B+ wave of mortgages resetting from sub-2% rates) argue for margin compression and PCL normalization, not extrapolation.

The contrarian bull case worth taking seriously: Canadian banks have been called overvalued and mortgage-vulnerable for a decade and the oligopoly keeps grinding out returns. Deposit franchise, wealth management (up meaningfully post-cycle), and U.S. commercial (Private Wealth via CIBC US) are real. If you believe rates stay structurally higher than the 2010s, NIMs don't compress as much as bears fear, and the 2.4% dividend on a stock buying back shares gives you a reasonable total return floor. Fair. But that's a case for fair value around $110–115, not $140+. Where the models are thin: no PCL/allowance data, no CET1 ratio (critical for a bank — you cannot analyze a bank without capital adequacy), no NIM trajectory, no efficiency ratio, no breakdown of U.S. vs Canadian earnings mix. The "debt_to_equity: 0" is nonsense for a bank (banks are levered ~15–20x on assets). ROA of 0.76% at 13.2% ROE implies ~17x asset leverage, which is normal — but the model treating debt/equity as zero shows the framework isn't built for financials.

Net: the Synthesis verdict of undervalued with $148 fair value is wrong because it extrapolates cyclical peak earnings. Market Forces has it right that this is over-extrapolation, though "significant premium to fair value" may overstate the downside — a 10–15% overvaluation is more defensible than a 40% one. Thesis Evaluation's -11 score and Narrative's "anchored, minimal premium" are the most honest reads: this is a competent bank at a full price where the risk/reward is asymmetric to the downside because you're paying peak-cycle multiples for peak-cycle earnings. Insider activity wasn't provided; would want to see it. The 2.4% dividend + ~3% buyback yield gives ~5% shareholder return floor, so this isn't a short — it's a "don't chase" and wait for the credit cycle to do its work. Entry around $95–100 (roughly 12x normalized $5.4B on 890M shares) would be attractive; current $120.66 is not.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-12 13:22:58
Verdict Overvalued at $120.66 — the rebound to $6.06B of earnings is real, but 19x earnings and 2.6x book overstate the durability of a low-teens-ROE bank; fair value is closer to $95-$105.

The numbers say CIBC is in a real earnings recovery, but the stock already prices that recovery as if it were a durable, low-risk compounding engine. Revenue has risen from $14.39B in 2021 to $20.94B in 2025, a 45% increase in four years, while net income moved from $4.62B to $6.06B despite the ugly 2023 dip to $3.59B. That rebound is strong: 2025 net income is up 18.5% from 2024 and nearly 69% from 2023. Operating cash flow at $9.83B also supports that earnings are not purely accounting noise. But when I map those absolute profits to valuation, the tension is obvious. At a $108.6B market cap, investors are paying about 17.9x 2025 net income and 5.7x sales for a bank generating 13.2% ROE and 0.76% ROA. That is not distressed-bank pricing; it is quality-bank pricing. A 2.59x price-to-book on $45.77B of equity is especially rich for a bank with low-teens ROE rather than high-teens ROE.

What stands out most is that the improvement in earnings has outpaced the improvement in the underlying franchise economics. Revenue grew 13.8% in the latest year, and net margin reached 28.9%, but the return profile still looks merely good, not exceptional. A 13.24% ROE against 2.59x book means the market is capitalizing each dollar of equity as if CIBC can sustain superior returns for a very long time. That may be too generous for a traditional bank whose earnings are inherently tied to credit conditions, funding costs, and a mature domestic market. The 2023 earnings reset matters because it showed how quickly profitability can compress even in a protected banking structure. If 2025 is viewed as normalized earnings, the stock is not cheap; if 2025 is viewed as a cyclical high point in the recovery, the stock is expensive.

I also do not buy the “undervalued because DCF says so” framing when the simple multiples already imply a lot of confidence. Dividend yield is only 2.4%, which is modest for a bank and offers less valuation support than many financials. Price-to-sales near 5.7x and P/E near 19.6x are not what I would call a margin-of-safety setup for a lender with only low-teens returns on equity. For me, fair value is better anchored off profitability and book than off a long-duration cash-flow model that can overstate value when current earnings are temporarily flattered. If CIBC were trading around 1.8x-2.0x book or 13x-15x earnings on these returns, I could get interested. At $120.66, I think investors are paying up for stability and recent momentum, while ignoring that the business has not demonstrated a structurally higher return regime.

The best case against my view is straightforward: the bank has plainly earned the rerating. Net income has gone from $5.11B to $6.06B in one year, revenue has compounded at 11.8% since 2021, and the 2023 stumble now looks like a temporary trough rather than evidence of impairment. If 13%-plus ROE is a conservative base and management can keep compounding book value while sustaining near-29% net margins, then 2.6x book may reflect scarcity value in a concentrated Canadian banking market. The bull would also argue that a $108.6B franchise with $9.83B in operating cash flow and a durable domestic deposit base deserves a premium to more cyclical or fragmented financials. I weigh that differently because the valuation already assumes resilience, while the recent history still shows earnings cyclicality and no evidence yet of a step-change to returns that would justify paying almost 18x earnings for a bank.

What would change my mind is not another year of revenue growth alone, but proof that profitability is sustainably better than I think. If CIBC can deliver ROE above 15% while keeping net income above $6.5B and growing equity without a multiple expansion, I would revisit a more constructive stance even around the current price. Conversely, if revenue growth slows back toward mid-single digits and earnings slip below roughly $5.5B, the current multiple should compress meaningfully. As it stands, the stock looks priced for a clean continuation of the 2024-2025 rebound, and I think that is too optimistic. My rough fair value is closer to $95-$105, where the stock would better reflect a solid but cyclical bank rather than an elite compounder.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-12 13:23:44
Verdict Modestly overvalued at $120.66 — 19.6x earnings and 2.59x book overpay for a 13.2% ROE recovery that is still cyclical

The raw numbers tell a clean recovery story that is easy to over-read as structural acceleration. CIBC’s revenue climbed from $14.39B in 2021 to $20.94B in fiscal 2025, an 11.8% CAGR, while net income swung from a $3.59B trough in 2023 through $5.11B and into $6.06B—producing a flashy 29.9% earnings CAGR and an 18.5% most-recent YoY jump that is almost entirely the unwind of prior credit and rate pressure. Net margin of 28.9% and ROE of 13.2% look respectable, and operating cash flow of $9.83B against $45.77B of equity confirms the franchise is throwing off real cash. What stands out, however, is how fully that recovery is already capitalized: at $120.66 the stock trades 19.6x trailing earnings and 2.59x book. For a diversified Canadian bank whose ROA is a thin 0.76% and whose debt-to-equity field is incomplete (typical bank leverage is simply not captured), those multiples embed the assumption that mid-teens revenue growth and high-20s margins persist. The 2023 trough mechanically inflates the growth rates; trend earnings power closer to the $5.0–5.5B range would put the multiple nearer 20–22x, which is rich for a rate-sensitive lender heading into possible NIM compression and provision normalization.

The valuation synthesis that prints a $141–148 fair value (+23%) is the clearest internal contradiction. It collides with a 19.6x PE that already sits at the upper end of the Canadian bank historical band, a thesis score of –11, and market-forces language that correctly flags late-cycle mortgage concentration and U.S. commercial execution risk. A simple justified P/B check—ROE 13%, cost of equity ~9–10%, sustainable growth 3–4%—points to roughly 1.5–1.9x book before any oligopoly premium; 2.59x therefore already embeds a generous structural moat plus continued earnings momentum. The 2.4% dividend yield is only average income support at this price. In short, the market is not discounting CIBC; it is paying a full price for a mid-tier franchise whose recent beat is cyclical, not a new earnings regime.

The strongest counter-argument is the oligopoly itself. Canadian banking concentration, pricing power, and the durable “steady-compounder” narrative have historically allowed these names to clear 2.0–2.5x book when credit is benign, and the housing-correction scarring of 2022–23 is already in the rear-view. Bulls will also note that revenue confidence is tagged high, the stock screens above sector benchmarks, and the absence of narrative froth means there is little story premium to deflate—only fundamentals. If the $6.06B net-income run-rate proves sticky through a modest rate-cut cycle and U.S. commercial losses stay contained, the DCF gap closes and 19x earnings becomes the new normal rather than a peak multiple. I weigh that less heavily because the same data set already shows ROE only modestly above cost of capital and an earnings CAGR that will mean-revert hard once the 2023 base rolls off; paying 2.59x book today leaves little margin for the macro headwinds the secondary signals themselves flag.

I would flip to a clear undervalued stance if fiscal 2026 net income holds above $6.2B with stable or rising NIM, if the P/B compresses toward 2.0x on market weakness without an earnings break, or if credit provisions remain below the through-cycle average for two consecutive quarters while the U.S. book shows no tariff-related spike. Conversely, a print of NI below $5.3B or a material uptick in impaired loans would confirm the multiple is too high and push the stock toward high-teens downside.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 1.7; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +0.3 vs panel · self: 4.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.7 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
No second round needed — Panel agreed within band (spread 1: Claude: overvalued · GPT: overvalued · Grok: fairly_valued) — second round not warranted
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · four lenses
Four separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), and AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-12 13:27:14
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Solid but not cheap enough - wait for sub-$110 6/10
CIBC is a solid Big-Six bank at a modest discount to fair value, but the AI panel's overvalued call and a balanced tape argue for patience, not initiation here.
The cruxWhether the 2025 earnings rebound (NI 6.06B, 13% ROE) proves durable through the next credit cycle - if PCLs normalize benignly, my $141 FV holds; if the panel is right that this is peak-cycle at 19x/2.6x book, fair value is $100-110 and I'm buying air.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from CM's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionStable Share Count
Earnings QualityGood Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+48
Solid
edge √Σ 89 · risk √Σ 36 · conf 7/10

CIBC shows a clean mature-earner profile: revenue grew from 14.39B (2021) to 20.94B (2025), a ~9.8% CAGR, with net income rebounding from a 2023 trough of 3.59B to 6.06B in 2025 (+69% over two years). Free cash flow is consistently positive at 7.88-9.83B in recent years and OCF/NI of 1.73x with slightly negative accruals (-0.4% of assets) point to real, cash-backed earnings rather than accounting-driven prints. Liquid cash of 8.80B against zero net debt in the module framing indicates the business is self-funding at the holdco level. Dilution is contained: diluted share CAGR of ~1.6% and SBC at just 0.1% of revenue mean per-share value is not being quietly eroded (the 2024 dip to 705.8M then rebound to 983.5M looks like a data artifact rather than a real buyback-then-issuance cycle - flag for verification). The Altman Z of 0.16 is a false alarm - the model is not meaningful for deposit-taking banks whose balance sheets are structurally leveraged by design. What I cannot see from this data: credit quality, PCL trends, CET1 ratio, exposure to Canadian residential mortgages and US commercial real estate (a known CIBC pressure point in recent cycles), and net interest margin trajectory. Those are the real quality determinants for a bank and none are in the brief. On what is shown - growing revenue, recovering earnings, cash-backed profits, minimal dilution - this reads as a healthy, well-run diversified bank.

Strengths 4
m55
Earnings recovery with cash backing
Net income rose from 3.59B in 2023 to 6.06B in 2025 while OCF/NI ran at 1.73x and accruals were -0.4% of assets - the recovery is cash-validated, not accrual-inflated.
m45
Revenue compounding steadily
Top line grew 14.39B to 20.94B over four years (~9.8% CAGR) with each year higher than the last - unusual consistency for a bank across a rate-cycle whipsaw.
m40
Dilution discipline
Diluted share CAGR of 1.6% and SBC at 0.1% of revenue mean shareholders are not being diluted meaningfully - per-share economics track headline economics.
m35
Self-funding FCF profile
FCF of 7.88-9.83B in the last three years against 8.80B liquid cash - the bank funds itself without needing capital markets access for going-concern operations.
Concerns 2
m30
Bank-specific risks invisible in this data
Nothing here shows credit quality, PCLs, CET1, or US office/CRE exposure - CIBC has historically had higher provisioning volatility than peers, and that risk is simply not measurable from the module output.
m20
Share count series looks noisy
Diluted shares moved 967.3M (2023) to 705.8M (2024) to 983.5M (2025) - almost certainly a data error rather than real capital action, but it undermines confidence in the per-share picture until verified.
This looks like a normal, well-run Big-Six Canadian bank in recovery mode after a rough 2023. The numbers I can see are clean: earnings are backed by cash, revenue is compounding, dilution is trivial, and the Altman distress flag is a category error for a bank. That gets it into 'solid, improving' territory. What keeps me from grading higher is not something I found - it's what I cannot see: credit quality, capital adequacy, and the CRE book. Banks live and die on tail risk that does not show up in a P&L trajectory until it does. On visible evidence: Solid. On the honest confession that a bank's quality is 70% invisible in this data: I would not go higher than that without the credit and capital detail.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • Actual diluted share count trajectory 2023-2025 (the 705.8M 2024 figure looks like a data error)
  • CET1 ratio and OSFI regulatory capital buffer trend
  • Provision for credit losses trend and stage-3 loan formation, especially US commercial real estate
  • Canadian residential mortgage renewal exposure at higher rates (2025-2026 renewal wall)
  • Net interest margin trajectory and deposit beta
  • Dividend payout ratio and any share repurchase authorization
Valuation / Mispricing
+24
Modestly Cheap
edge √Σ 68 · risk √Σ 43 · conf 6/10
Price $120.69 vs deserved ~$141, roughly 17% discount - modestly cheap, not deep value. attractive below $110.00

The composite fair value of $140.93 (signal-adjusted $148.12) implies roughly 17-23% upside from $120.69. The anchored-PE cross-check lands at the same $140.93, which gives me confidence the fair value isn't a runaway DCF artifact - it's grounded in earnings multiples appropriate for a Big-Six Canadian bank. Earnings quality is good, so I don't need to haircut the deserved value materially. What's priced in at $120.69 is a bank facing NIM compression as the BoC cuts, some U.S. commercial credit anxiety, and Canadian consumer stress - a reasonable but not heroic bear case. What's NOT priced in is normalized cross-cycle earnings power on a franchise that has already worked through its 2023 credit reset. The gap isn't a dislocation; it's the kind of 15-20% discount you often see on solid banks the market has decided are 'fine, just boring.' Margin of safety exists but isn't fat - one bad credit quarter closes half of it.

Cheap signals 2
m55
Composite FV ~17% above price
Composite $140.93 and signal-adjusted $148.12 vs $120.69 imply 17-23% upside, with the anchored-PE method independently landing at $140.93 - the fair value is not a runaway output.
m40
Solid business, clean earnings
Good earnings-quality signal means no haircut to deserved value; the quality lens confirms cash-backed earnings and negligible dilution, so the fair value stands.
Rich / priced-in 2
m35
Bank cyclical risks cap the gap
NIM compression from BoC cuts, U.S. commercial credit exposure post-tariffs, and Canadian consumer stress are real and could compress the deserved multiple - the market's discount to FV is partially earned.
m25
Bank valuations resist FV expansion
Canadian Big-Six banks rarely trade at big premiums to book/earnings; the 17% gap may take multiple quarters of clean credit prints to close rather than snap shut.
Modestly cheap, not a fat pitch. Roughly 17% below composite fair value on a solid Big-Six bank with clean earnings quality is worth owning for total return, but it's not the kind of gap I chase aggressively. I'd want it closer to $110 - about a 22% discount to FV - before I'd call it a real margin of safety, because banks are cyclical and one bad credit surprise erases 8-10% of the gap fast. At $120.69 it's a hold-or-nibble, not a pound-the-table buy.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Provision for credit losses trend, especially U.S. commercial book
  • NIM guidance for next 2-3 quarters as BoC cuts flow through
  • CET1 ratio and any dividend growth signal
  • Canadian residential mortgage renewal wall exposure and delinquency trend
General Sentiment
+0
Balanced
tail √Σ 0 · head √Σ 0 · conf 6/10

CM is a steady-compounder Canadian bank with a minimal-intensity narrative and low cult coefficient - meaning the tape moves it, not the story. The current regime is modestly risk-on (+47) with VIX at 15.3, which is a gentle tailwind for a beta-1.28 name, but the macro backdrop cuts the other way: a 4.72% 10y and 26x market PE press directly on bank NIMs and rate-sensitive multiples, and Canadian banks specifically carry the added overhang of eventual BoC cuts, mortgage competition, and post-tariff U.S. commercial exposure risk. Net, the macro pressure on this specific name is a light-to-moderate headwind. Analyst tone and news flow around CM are quiet - there is no breaking story, no target-revision wave, no cult bid. The bull case (fortress balance sheet, dividend compounder, discount to DCF) is a slow, boring narrative that does not generate momentum; the bear case (Canadian bank secular pressures) is also not acutely trending. With no active narrative catalyst either way, the stock trades on tape and sector rotation rather than story. Strong positive multi-year price momentum suggests the sector rotation has been supportive, but that is a fading tailwind as the risk-on impulse is only 7 days established and the macro backdrop is unfriendly to banks.

Tailwinds 0

None surfaced.

Headwinds 0

None surfaced.

This is a genuinely balanced sentiment picture. CM has no story working for it and no story breaking against it - the narrative is durable but minimal-intensity, so the stock trades on tape. The mild risk-on regime and intact price momentum give it a light lift, but the rate/valuation macro and Canadian-bank sector overhang press the other way with roughly equal force. Net, I read this as balanced-to-slightly-negative pressure - not enough to change a fundamental thesis, but a reminder that this name will not get a sentiment tailwind to pull it higher; any re-rating has to come from earnings, not story.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • BoC rate-cut path and any signal on NIM guidance from Q3 Canadian bank earnings
  • Canadian bank sector rotation - are flows leaving for U.S. financials or tech
  • Any credit-quality deterioration headlines in Canadian mortgages or CM's U.S. commercial book
  • Analyst target revisions post-earnings - divergence from consensus would be the first sentiment tell
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+30
Mildly favorable — charter shields the franchise, agents threaten the deposit spread
opp √Σ 86 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 7/10

CIBC is not an information business that AI can substitute; it is a licensed balance sheet wrapped in an information business. Cheap intelligence hits the wrapper: service, adjudication, compliance review, advisory documentation, trade support — plausibly several hundred basis points of efficiency ratio over five years, and CIBC starts with less peer-relative efficiency headroom to give away than it once had. The balance sheet itself is untouched: credit risk, capital and deposit insurance remain scarce and regulated. The genuine AI transmission risk is not disintermediation of the bank but disintermediation of customer inertia — the Big Six earn an oligopoly spread partly because switching is annoying, and agentic finance is a machine for making annoyance free. Net: cost tailwind is fairly reliable, revenue-side erosion is slower but structural, and the Canadian oligopoly means savings get partly competed into pricing.

AI opportunities 8
m51
Underlying Need Persistence
Deposits, credit, payments and capital intermediation do not go away because inference is cheap.
m26
Solution Persistence
The chartered-bank form persists; the branch-and-advisor delivery form keeps shrinking.
m42
Responsibility Transfer
Customers pay CIBC to carry credit, custody, fraud and AML liability — an unattractive thing to internalize.
m27
Scarcity Migration
Software and analysis become abundant; charters, insured funding and capital become relatively scarcer.
m29
Customer DIY Preference
No customer builds a bank; some will self-direct investing and treasury with AI help.
m12
Data Leverage
Rich transaction and credit data improves risk models, but every Big Six peer holds a comparable set.
m18
AI Margin Conversion
A large expense base offers real efficiency-ratio headroom; oligopoly competition returns some of it to customers.
m18
Entrant Compression
Capital and licensing barriers survive cheap software; narrow-product entrants get materially cheaper to launch.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

Buy the charter, not the software story: AI is a fairly reliable cost tailwind for CIBC, and the only thing that turns it negative is agentic deposit-shopping eating the spread before the savings land. Position 58 with a 35–75 range: the balance sheet is AI-proof, the expense base is AI-addressable, and the real bet is on ai_margin_conversion (61) beating ai_intermediation_position (45). The unlock is a visible, sustained efficiency-ratio improvement in Canadian P&SB without a matching step-up in personal deposit beta; the killer is Canada's open-banking framework going live alongside capable agents, which converts a sticky primary-chequing franchise into a rate-shopped commodity. Watch renewal retention and deposit beta quarterly — those move before any AI narrative does.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Efficiency ratio trend by segment
  • Headcount vs. revenue growth
  • Technology spend as % of expense
  • Canadian open-banking rollout timing
  • Primary chequing account retention
  • Mortgage renewal retention rate
  • Wealth fee rate on AUM
  • Deposit beta on personal accounts
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Four lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for CM. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
Data via Financial Modeling Prep · Cached for performance · twelvedata
v1.1.532 · 1ec19de8 · 2026-08-13 17:53:37