---
ticker: "VST"
company: "Vistra Corp."
date: "2026-10-26"
view: "Hold"
fair_value: 142.98
price: 143.17
price_source: "last trade 13:21:38 ET 2026-10-26 (regular session; official close 2026-10-23 $140.16)"
price_time: "2026-10-26T17:21:38Z"
price_vs_fair_value: "+0.1%"
bear: 63.88
bull: 246.27
exit_price: 155.65
p_price_justified: "over 50%"
restated: "2026-10-26"
method: "case-spread-2026-10-24"
original_fair_value: 143
original_view: "Hold"
page: "https://alpha.dming.si/research/2026-10-26-vst"
---

# VST · Vistra Corp. · Hold

Research report as of 2026-10-26, partly unblinded. Page: https://alpha.dming.si/research/2026-10-26-vst

We value VST at $143 a share. The report's $143.17 price (Oct 26, 2026) was 0.1% above fair value: Hold.

_Restated Oct 26, 2026 (method case-spread-2026-10-24); the report's original value was $143, Hold._

| Lens | Range | Marks |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Our report | $63.88 to $246 | fair $143; original $143 |
| Our simulation | $89.52 to $245 | median $143 |
| Street targets (11) | $169 to $298 | average $208, median $204 |
| Price | | $143.17 |

Bands run from our bear to bull (the hollow mark is the original $143), our simulation's 10th to 90th percentile and the Street's low to high. Street targets forecast future prices, not value today. Market data, captured Oct 26, 2026.

| Figure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Fair value | $143 |
| Price | $143.17 (market data, Oct 26, 10:21 AM PT) |
| Five-year return | 9.9% (a year, at the report's price) |
| Bear / bull | $63.88 / $246 |
| Exit price | $156 (on Dec 31, 2031) |
| Confidence | 38% |
| Price against our scenarios | The price is justified in over 50% of our scenarios (4,000 simulated outcomes, each drawing the uncertain drivers from ranges we chose: our judgement, not a measured chance) |

**What the price needs.** Any one of these, on its own, would justify the price:

- Merchant power margin vs our path, $/MWh: needs 0.0891, we have 0
- PJM capacity price from June 2030, $/MW-day: needs 327, we have 325
- 2027 core EBITDA, $B: needs 7.36, we have 7.35

_This text argues the original call. The current figures are at the top._

**Original call, Oct 26, 2026 (before the Oct 26, 2026 restatement)**

_As of 2026-10-26 · partly unblinded: the model was committed () before the price was read; the filings and the Q2 call carried three price signals (assumptions.md)_

- **Fair value today:** $143 per diluted share ($142.98), at a 9.94% cost of equity. Weighting the pessimistic, central and optimistic cases 25/50/25 (our weights) gives $149. The blind model gave $140; the review added $3 (below)
- **Price:** $143.17, last trade 2026-10-26 13:21:38 ET (official close 2026-10-23 $140.16) → 0.1% above fair value
- **Five-year exit price:** $156 on 2031-12-31: the average of a long fade of returns toward the cost of capital ($102) and an outside view at 14.2 times operating profit ($209). Fading over 10 or 20 years gives $156 or $155
- **Five-year return:** 9.9% a year from $143.17 to the central exit, payouts included
- **Bear / bull today:** $64 / $246: the pessimistic and optimistic cases, each one coherent world
- **Confidence:** About 38%: the share of our simulated values within 20% of $143, interpolated from odds.json's percentiles (subjective, not calibrated)
- **Moat:** The largest competitive generator with its own retail book (about 5 million customers), and a nuclear fleet that buyers of data-center power pay a premium for; no moat against power prices, which it does not set
- **Market expects:** Our central case: 2027 core EBITDA of $7.36B (ours $7.35B), or PJM capacity at $327 from 2030 (ours $325), everything else ours
- **Price needs:** One of: merchant margin +$0.09/MWh from 2029; capacity $327/MW-day from June 2030; 2027 core EBITDA $7.36B (odds.json)
- **Odds:** P(price justified): 50%, the top of the 20-50% band; eight in ten simulated values fall between $90 and $245 (subjective, not calibrated)
- **Key driver:** The exit multiple: 12x operating profit gives $129, the method's default 20.4x gives $182; each 1x is about $6.3. Among operating inputs, 2027 core EBITDA: $3.3 a share per $0.1B
- **Street:** Average 12-month target $207.50 (median $204, range $169-298); 6 targets in the last month averaging $189, down from $218 over the year (market data via research-check, 2026-10-26). An expectations reference, not validation

**Hold at $143 a share against $143.17: value and price are level.** Vistra's next five years are
mostly written down already: 2027 is 94% hedged, PJM capacity is sold at
$325-333 a megawatt-day through May 2029, and two 20-year nuclear
contracts (Amazon at Comanche Peak, Meta in Ohio and Pennsylvania) start
delivering in late 2026 and 2027. Those, plus the Cogentrix gas plants,
take Adjusted EBITDA from $7.3B in 2026 to about $9.6B in 2031 in our
central case. The price is what that path is worth: our value is 18
cents below it, so the rule (Buy at or below fair value) gives a Hold by a
hair, and any of several $2-3 judgments below would tip it either way. It does not need
more data-center contracts or higher power prices, and it does not pay for
them either. What it cannot absorb is ERCOT power staying near $30 and the
PJM capacity price falling toward the collar floor once the collar ends:
that world is worth $64.

## What the business is and who pays

Vistra owns about 44 GW of generation (end-2025: 27.0 GW gas, 8.7 GW
coal, 6.4 GW nuclear, 1.3 GW solar and batteries; 10-K) and sells to
about 5 million retail customers, mostly through TXU Energy in Texas
(139 TWh of retail sales in 2025). The retail book is the natural buyer of
the plants' output: when wholesale prices rise, the plants gain and
retail margins shrink, and the other way round. Adjusted EBITDA in 2025
was $5.912B: Retail $1.622B, Texas $1.834B, East $2.282B, West $0.244B
(release, 2026-02-26). Since then Vistra added the Lotus gas plants
(2,600 MW, closed 2025-10-22) and has Cogentrix (5,496 MW) pending.

Three sources of revenue matter and they behave differently:

- **Energy.** Sold forward through hedges two to three years out. As of
  2026-08-03 Vistra had hedged about 100% of 2026, 94% of 2027 and 72% of
  2028 (release, 2026-08-07), up from 84% and 58% in February. Hedging
  delays price moves; it does not remove them.
- **Capacity.** PJM pays generators to be available. Vistra cleared
  10,314 MW at $329.17 for 2026/27, 10,566 MW at $333.44 for 2027/28 and
  10,924 MW at $325.00 for 2028/29 (8-Ks 2025-07-23, 2025-12-17,
  2026-07-14). Each was at a price cap PJM agreed with the states; the
  2028/29 auction would have cleared at $554.72 without it and fell
  6.8 GW short of the reliability target (PJM auction report, 2026-07-14).
  The collar runs through the 2029/30 auction (PJM filing ER26-1556). What
  follows is not decided.
- **Long contracts.** Comanche Peak: 1,200 MW to Amazon Web Services for 20
  years, delivery from Q4 2027, full by 2032; management expects 8-10%
  more free cash flow at full use (8-K 2025-09-29). Meta: 2,176 MW from
  Perry and Davis-Besse from late 2026, full by end 2027, plus 433 MW of
  uprates from 2031 to 2034, for 8-10% and 5-7% more free cash flow
  (8-K 2026-01-09). No price is disclosed; the accretion implies a premium
  of roughly $40-50 per MWh over the market at the time (our inference).

The nuclear production tax credit (45U) pays up to $15 per MWh (2024
dollars, indexed) when a plant's gross receipts are low, phasing out
between $25 and $43.75. It paid Vistra $545M in 2024 and $220M in 2025
(10-Q 2026-06-30) and runs through 2032. It is a floor under the merchant
nuclear fleet in a bad price year, and it ends one year after our forecast;
the model removes it from the 2031 profit the fade carries forward.

## Recent results and the bar set

| Year | Original guide midpoint | Actual | Gap |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2024 | $4.80B | $5.656B | +$0.856B (of which $0.545B PTC, which the guide left out) |
| 2025 | $5.80B | $5.912B | +$0.112B |
| 2026 | $7.20B | H1 $3.261B (+26%); CFO "at or above the midpoint" | |

(Releases 2025-02-27, 2026-02-26, 2026-08-07.) Management has beaten its
own first guide in each of the last two years, in 2024 mostly through a
tax credit it chose not to guide. That record is real but short; it says
guidance is set to be beaten, not that the 2027 range will be. The CFO said
on 2026-08-07 that 2027 is "trending towards the lower end" of the
$7.4-7.8B midpoint opportunity because ERCOT forwards fell, and that
Cogentrix and the Meta contracts add "roughly $700 million". Our 2027 is
$8.0B: $7.35B core, $0.50B Cogentrix, $0.15B Meta.

## Our forecast

The model builds Adjusted EBITDA from parts that move on their own
(model.py, output.txt):

| $B | 2027 | 2028 | 2029 | 2030 | 2031 |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Adjusted EBITDA, central | 8.00 | 8.44 | 8.76 | 9.28 | 9.64 |
| of which under signed 20-year contracts (Meta, uprates, Comanche Peak: full margin) | 0.32 | 1.20 | 1.34 | 1.48 | 1.67 |
| of which PJM capacity (10 GW) | 1.21 | 1.20 | 1.19 | 1.19 | 1.19 |
| EBIT after stock pay and depreciation | 5.52 | 5.94 | 6.26 | 6.76 | 7.10 |
| Free cash flow after growth capex | 3.37 | 3.61 | 3.38 | 3.65 | 3.83 |
| Paid to shareholders (2.75x leverage held) | 2.25 | 4.84 | 4.27 | 5.06 | 4.84 |

Where it differs from management: our 2027 core is $0.05B under the low
end of their range; we haircut the Cogentrix EBITDA they quoted ($0.552B)
by 10%; we take $0.15B a year off from 2028 for the 4.6 GW of coal plants
retiring by mid-2028 (10-K Note 7); and we hold the PJM capacity price at
$325 in nominal dollars while costs inflate 2.5% a year, so capacity
shrinks in real terms. Merchant margins move -1, -1, 0 and +0.5 dollars
per MWh in real terms in 2028-2031 on the 85 TWh still exposed: ERCOT
forwards for 2026-2030 fell over the year and now sit at $53-55 on-peak,
far below the $138 it costs to build a peaker (ERCOT board, 2026-06-01),
while PJM forwards rose (CFO). We add one more gigawatt of data-center
contract from 2030 at $15 per MWh over market; management says it is "in
active negotiations" and has projects in ERCOT's Batch Zero, but nothing is
signed.

Capital: maintenance and nuclear fuel $1.54B in 2026 (guide) plus $0.10B
for Cogentrix, rising with inflation; growth capex $0.7-0.9B a year,
mostly the PJM uprates and life extensions (a program we put at $3.5B over
2026-2034; DOE offered a conditional loan of up to $4.2B on 2026-10-06,
World Nuclear News, press). Cogentrix closes late 2026 for $2.3B cash,
$1.5B of assumed debt and 5 million shares (10-Q Note 2). Net debt rises
from $20.3B at end-2025 to $22.0B at end-2027 and is held at 2.75 times
EBITDA after, under management's "below 3x" target (8-K 2026-01-05); the
rest is paid out, valued at fair value with the share count held. Cash
taxes stay low through 2028 on $3.8B of federal NOLs (10-K Note 6).

## Value

The method values each case's 2031 business twice and takes the average:

- **Long fade**: returns on new capital fade from 8.0% to a mature 8%,
  against an 8.53% cost of capital. New investment roughly earns its cost,
  so growth after 2031 adds little. The fade is worth 9.0 times 2031 EBIT,
  $102 a share at exit.
- **Outside view**: 14.2 times 2031 EBIT, $209 a share. This is a judged
  change from the method's default of 20.4 times, the mean of Vistra's and
  its peers' ten-year median EV/EBIT. For a hedged generator those years
  are distorted twice: GAAP EBIT swings with unrealised hedge marks (CEG
  at 80.9 times in 2020, Vistra at 54.4 times in 2017, loss years dropped),
  and 2023-25 holds the data-center rerating. We price the 17% of 2031
  EBITDA under signed 20-year investment-grade contracts (the premium and
  the underlying margin on the Meta and Comanche Peak megawatt-hours, and
  Meta's capacity) at the regulated utilities' median (PEG and EXC, 20.2 times) and the rest at the merchant
  generators' pooled median for 2016-2022 (the ten valid NRG and Vistra
  years, 12.9 times). This follows the business mix, not the company's own
  multiple from a period with different growth.

The two halves are 105% apart. The gap is the mature return: the fade
assumes Vistra's new capital earns about its cost (Cogentrix on
management's own numbers yields 6.6% after tax), while the market's
history paid 13 times for merchant generators whose returns were lower
still. We take the average as the method asks; the judgment range below
shows what each choice is worth.

**Judgment range** (central fair value; view against $143.17, where Buy is
at or below fair value and Avoid below 85% of the price, $122):

| Method choice | Fair value | View |
| --- | ---: | --- |
| Outside view at 10x EBIT | $116 | Avoid |
| Outside view at 12x | $129 | Hold |
| All merchant at 12.9x | $135 | Hold |
| Blind draft: contracted share counted the premium only (13.7x) | $140 | Hold |
| **Judged 14.2x (this report)** | **$143** | **Hold, by $0.19** |
| Depreciation set to maintenance capex (fade only) | $147 | Buy |
| Outside view at 16x | $154 | Buy |
| Outside view at 18x | $167 | Buy |
| All at the utility median, 20.2x | $181 | Buy |
| Method default, anchor (d) 20.4x | $182 | Buy |
| Vistra's own beta (1.257) | $135 | Hold |

The call turns on how much of Vistra the market should value like a
utility. At 14.2 times value and price are level. A reader who believes the contracted
share will reach a third of EBITDA, or that the 2023-25 rerating is
permanent, gets a Buy from the same operating forecast.

**Operating sensitivities** (central $143): merchant margin ±$5 per MWh
from 2029: -$10.6 / +$10.9; PJM capacity from June 2030 at $175 (collar
floor) -$12.6, at $555 +$19.3; 2027 core EBITDA $7.0B -$11.7, $7.8B
+$15.1; mature return 6.5% -$7.5, 10% +$8.3; no new contract -$3.1, three
gigawatts +$6.2.

**Cases.** Pessimistic ($64): 2027 core $7.0B; ERCOT load slips after
the queue audit and batteries keep prices low, -$6 per MWh by 2029; PJM
capacity at $250 for 2029/30 and $200 after; no new contracts; uprates
cost 30% more; mature return 6.5%; leverage cut to 2.5 times; the Helix
stake worth nothing. Optimistic ($246): 2027 core $7.6B; load growth of
4-6% a year in ERCOT (management's estimate) lifts merchant margins $6 per
MWh by 2031; PJM capacity $450 from 2030; 2 GW of new contracts at $20
over market from 2029; mature return 10%. Each case takes its own exit
multiple through the method's case spread (9.8 and 20.7 times EBIT).
The pessimistic case stacks every adverse driver and the low multiple,
so it sits below 1% of our own simulation (the optimistic case sits near
the 90th percentile); with symmetric tails the case-weighted value would
be higher than $149 (the advocate's $152 on the draft).

## The market against our view

At $143.17 the price is our value: our central case earns 9.9% a year to
the exit from here, against a 9.94% cost of equity. The reverse
calculation says the price needs nothing beyond our central: 2027 core
EBITDA of $7.36B, or PJM capacity at $327 after the collar. Half our
simulated values sit above the price.

The Street is well above us. Its average 12-month target is $207.50
($189 for the six set in the last month); discounted one year at our
9.94%, $189, so our value is 0.76 times it. The gap is the multiple, not
the operating path. The Street's EPS ($10.19 for 2027, $15.58 for 2030
from three analysts) looks 13-33% above ours ($9.01 and $11.68), but
ours holds the share count while the model pays out $4-5B a year. Spent
on buybacks, the same operating path gives 2030 EPS of $14.32 to $14.95
(Codex) or $15.94 (the advocate, at $143-150 a share), within 8% of the
Street through 2029. Run through our model, the Street's EPS path is
worth $186-206 at our 14.2x and more at the default 20.4x (Codex, script C):
the Street prices Vistra closer to the 2023-25 multiples our outside view
sets aside. Its targets have fallen over the year ($218 to $189 in the
last month) as ERCOT forwards fell.

Alpha, the quantitative model, ranks Vistra 688th of 696 (tier Weak;
expectations E, growth E, momentum D, quality D, valuation C; read
2026-10-26 from a partial cache awaiting the daily rerating). We differ
on growth: Alpha reads trailing GAAP results, which hedge marks and the
2025 Moss Landing and Martin Lake losses depressed, while our path rests on
contracts signed for 2027 and after. Neither view gives a margin of
safety at $143.

## Review and what changed after the blind commit

Two reviewers read the draft (0a0318b) with the market and flags: an Opus
advocate (`red-team` skill) and a Codex model auditor (gpt-5 class,
`codex exec`, read-only). The central value moved from $140.03 to $142.98.

| Finding (who) | Answer | Effect, $/share |
| --- | --- | ---: |
| The outside view's contracted share counted only the premium over market; the underlying margin on the contracted MWh and Meta's capacity are also fixed for 20 years (both; 8-Ks 2025-09-29, 2026-01-09 say "energy and capacity") | Fixed: margin at our $48/MWh receipts less NEI's 2025 fuel and operating cost ($28.24/MWh, from $36.46 total; NEI Nuclear Costs in Context, August 2026). Share 10.7% to 17.3%, multiple 13.7x to 14.2x | +3.16 |
| Leases: $0.338B was 2024's total; only 2025 finance leases ($0.222B) are debt, rent is in EBITDA (Codex) | Fixed | +0.32 |
| 2026 Nuveen interest ($0.037B), July buybacks ($0.068B) left out of the cash roll; junior notes at 7.1% charged at 5.3% (Codex) | Fixed | -0.53 |
| Net of the above | | +2.95 |
| The 2027 core may already hold nuclear PTC that ends after 2032 (Codex; CFO cites PTC support for 2027) | Disclosed: amount not disclosed by the company; each $0.1B embedded is -$2.2 | -2.2 per $0.1B |
| Low cash-tax rates 2027-28 ($0.98B saved) not reconciled to the $0.80B NOL value (Codex) | Disclosed: bonus depreciation and the Cogentrix step-up may explain it; full-rate taxes would cost | -2.47 |
| PTC indexing should round to the IRS's published $15/$26 for 2026; credit income is tax-exempt (Codex) | Disclosed, not changed: zero in the central case | +0.11 |
| Comanche Peak EBITDA could be $0.54-0.68B at management's medium-term conversion, not our $0.44B (Codex) | Disclosed: the filing gives free cash flow, not EBITDA; our 80% conversion follows the Meta 8-K | up to +3.37 |
| Margin posted ($1.31B own cash) could return at exit; non-nuclear ARO residual $0.5B not reconciled (Codex) | Disclosed: left out, both directions conditional | +2.34 / -0.89 |
| 2027 core below management (CFO: low end $7.4B plus about $0.7B) (advocate) | Rejected: our haircut on a management claim was set blind; at $7.40B core and Cogentrix at $0.552B | +3.6 |
| Mature return 8% below the 8.53% WACC (advocate) | Rejected: Vistra's own returns do not support more | +2.6 at WACC |
| The pessimistic case sits below 1% of the simulation, so 25/50/25 understates the weighted value (advocate) | Disclosed in Cases | weighted +6 on the draft |
| The report's draft blamed the Street EPS gap on merchant prices; it is the share count (both) | Fixed: paragraph above | 0 |
| New Era Energy 200 MW, 20-year gas PPA at Odessa, signed 2026-09-18 (advocate; press, not checked against a filing) | Disclosed | about +0.6 |
| Flag 3, value near price | Cleared by both: blind to draft changed $0.00; the review's +$2.95 rests on filings and NEI, not the price. Codex notes the odds' lean worlds, edited after the price was read to carry the cases' 2027 core and mature return, moved the simulated median from $138 to $140 | |
| Flag 4, fade vs outside view | The mature return (8% against 8.53% WACC) against a 14.2x history; named above | |
| Flag 23, 90th percentile under the bull | Cleared by both: 9.8% of draws exceed the bull | |

The correction that moved the value toward the price is the one both
reviewers found independently, and it corrects the blind draft's own
stated rule (price contracted EBITDA like a utility), so we take it. We
did not take the advocate's two other changes, which rest on our judgment
of management's numbers. Net, the call is a Hold that is level with the
price; the PTC point alone is enough to put the value back under it.

## Bear case and why the other side could be right

The case from below: Vistra's merchant fleet is priced off ERCOT, where
around-the-clock power has settled near $30 for two years (CEO, Q2 call)
and forwards keep falling as batteries and solar arrive. Governor Abbott's
audit of the data-center queue may delay load that the 2027-2028 curve
assumes. PJM capacity at $325 is a political price, set by a collar that
ends with the 2029/30 auction; the states that asked for it want lower
bills. If both happen, the pessimistic $64 is not extreme: EBITDA is still
$7.9B in 2031 because of the contracts, but a buyer of a merchant
generator with falling prices paid 6-13 times EBIT before 2023.

The case from above: the 2028/29 auction cleared at the cap with a 6.8 GW
shortfall, and the uncollared price was $555. Data-center buyers are
paying existing nuclear plants a large premium over market for 20 years,
and Vistra has Comanche Peak's second unit and Beaver Valley (1.9 GW) not
yet under contract. Two more such deals and a capacity reset to $450 give
the optimistic $246.

## Next results preview

Q3 2026 results on Friday 2026-11-06 at 10 a.m. ET (company release,
2026-09-29). The CFO said the 2026 and 2027 guidance would be updated on
this call, with 2027 waiting for Cogentrix if it has not closed.

| Metric | Ours | Range | Why |
| --- | ---: | --- | --- |
| Adjusted EBITDA, Q3 ($B) | 1.95 | 1.80-2.10 | Q3 2025 $1.581B plus capacity at $329 from June against $270, Lotus plants, Martin Lake 1 back |
| Revenue ($B) | 5.4 | 4.4-6.6 | Q3 2025 $4.97B plus Lotus; unrealised hedge marks move it by $1B either way |
| Diluted EPS ($) | 2.30 | -0.50 to 4.50 | $2.30 before hedge marks; marks moved quarterly EPS from -0.93 to 5.25 since 2024 |
| 2026 Adjusted EBITDA guide midpoint ($B) | 7.30 | 7.20-7.45 | H1 $3.261B and the CFO's "at or above the midpoint" |
| 2027 Adjusted EBITDA guide midpoint incl. Cogentrix and Meta ($B) | 8.00 | 7.70-8.30 | low end $7.4B plus about $0.7B (CFO); graded only if given |
| 2028 generation hedged (%) | 82 | 76-90 | 58% in February, 65% in May, 72% in August |

Each $0.1B of 2027 core EBITDA above ours is worth about $3.3 a share.
The print that would move the value most is the 2027 guide: $7.7B or less
including Cogentrix and Meta puts us near the pessimistic core and takes
about $10 a share off; $8.3B or more adds a similar amount. A new
data-center contract is worth about $3 a GW at our premium, more if priced
like Meta's.

## Catalysts and falsifiers

- 2026-11-06: Q3 results and the 2026-2027 guidance update.
- Late 2026: Cogentrix closing (FERC approved August 2026; either side may
  walk after 2026-12-31, extendable twice by 90 days; 10-K).
- December 2026: PJM's 2029/30 auction, the last under the collar.
- 2027: PJM's design for 2030/31 and after; ERCOT Batch Zero decisions
  after the audit; first Meta and Comanche Peak deliveries.
- Falsifiers: 2027 guide below $7.7B including Cogentrix and Meta; ERCOT
  2028 forwards falling another $5 per MWh; a PJM rule for 2030/31 that
  caps capacity below $250; Comanche Peak energisation slipping past 2028.

## Sources

NEI, Nuclear Costs in Context (2025 cost data, August 2026), for the review's nuclear cost.
Primary: 10-K 2025 (filed 2026-02-27); 10-Qs Q1 and Q2 2026; 8-Ks
2025-05-21 to 2026-10-05 (Lotus, Comanche Peak, PJM auctions, Cogentrix,
Meta, debt); earnings releases Q4 2024 to Q2 2026; company release
2026-09-29 (Q3 date); PJM 2028/29 auction report and ER26-1556 filing;
ERCOT board item 14.2 (2026-06-01). Secondhand: Q2 2026 call transcript
(Quartr via market data). Press: World Nuclear News 2026-10-06 (DOE loan);
RTO Insider and Utility Dive on the 2028/29 auction and the collar. Market data
statements and fiscal-year-end multiples (fetched 2026-10-26).