IRR
VOYA NATURAL RESOURCES EQUITY INCOME FUND
stock NYSE

It's just that i have this tendency for other companies'shares and with canoo it did not end well. I lost so much on that that xl cannot calculate the IRR. It's less than -100%.

Happy to debate!
1)Share dilution was 9.5% YoY despite the buybacks. Buyback is currently small, and I taper dilution down to 2% (down from 5%) after the acquisition related issuance and preferred stock dilution. this will mainly reflect SBC and any future unmodelled dilutive effects thereafter. Series A auto converts by FY28 which could equate to a large step rather than a smoothed increase as I have modelled. Series B carries a paid in kind dividend feature that keeps growing the share count independent of any new financing event.
2) I dont use multiples. I only have implied P/FCF multiple for reference. Terminal growth at 2% and this is pretty standard. I also account for a sharp drop in real growth to the terminal growth rate by factoring in a competitive advantage period formula that brings growth to its terminal rate over (in this instance) 22 years.
3) I wasn't able to find any proof that most of the industry growth is coming from sugar free. But with that point in mind, I also have Celsius growing beyond industry.
4) "It is the hottest energy drink company on the market now and has a ton of room to grow in the under focused female wellness population."
\- Perhaps... but until the brand cements itself, it is also at risk of becoming yet another brand fad. There's not really a moat of any kind here (eventually it's possible - but as of yet I dont view Alani Nu as having any moat). Names like Red Bull or Monster are household. But we will have to wait and see which brands truly come on top in the wellness energy space long term. It could be far more concentrated or competitive than either of us realize. But IMO, its better to be conservative and discount it until it truly becomes forecastable.
5) Absolutely possible that I am underweighting further international expansion. That's where my other scenarios come into play and even with further growth without margin compression, its just not attractive to me (although it definitely starts to look better with a 7% 7-year IRR). in the base case scenario, I would still wait until $20/sh for it to fit my framework.
6) Its fine if you believe Management's margin comments, but again I would rather be conservative based on what I view as realistic. Not accounting for competition in a sector that is seeing this type of growth is careless especially when you are already seeing the likes of Kirkland entering.
7) Again, you make an absolutely fine point, but I could say you are underestimating the impact of competition. Competition does not mean Celsius is dethroned. but it does mean that we can likely expect both top line, and margin compression.
Only time will tell which scenario plays out, but The reason I posted this was that I noticed many others only focus on the growth without recognizing the competition, and likely scenario where growth tapers and margins compress.

30 companies all able to generate 15%+ IRR over multi year periods, or 10 companies with the same return prospects? i would take the more diversified portfolio any day of the week.
With that said, diversification becomes more important to an individual as your annual primary income source becomes more insignificant in the replacement value of an investment thesis gone wrong. if you are early in your career, I would agree with you. when I started, I had about 5 companies. then 12, then 20, and today its 30+.
As long as those additions aren't reducing your overall expected return, I view them as a good thing.
But hey, to each their own!

**1. Executive Summary & Core Thesis**
District Metals Corp. (**TSX-V: DMX** / **OTCQX: DMXCF** / **Nasdaq First North: DMXSE SDB**) is an exploration and development company focused on its flagship **Viken Deposit** in Jämtland County, Sweden.
Viken represents the **largest undeveloped Mineral Resource Estimate of uranium in the world**, alongside massive deposits of vanadium, potash, nickel, copper, and zinc. As Europe actively seeks domestic supply chain security for critical raw materials and nuclear fuel, DMX sits on an asset with multi-billion-dollar potential.
**2. Project Economics & Unmatched Resource Scale (Summer 2026 PEA)**
In July 2026, District Metals filed its independent **Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA)** for a 13-year Phase 1 mine plan at Viken, demonstrating elite financial metrics:
**Base-Case After-Tax NPV (8%):** **US$ 2.88 Billion**
**After-Tax Internal Rate of Return (IRR):** **45.9%**
**Payback Period:** **2.1 years**
**Initial Capital Expenditure (CapEx):** **US$ 876 Million**
**Average Annual Free Cash Flow:** **US$ 531 Million** (after tax, over 13-year LOM).
**The 3% Resource Utilization Factor:** The Phase 1 mine plan contemplates extracting **127.4M tonnes** over 13 years. This draws from only a portion of the Indicated Resource (456M tonnes) and **completely excludes the massive Inferred Resource of 4,333M tonnes** (\~1.5 billion lbs of U\_3O\_8). This means the **$2.88B NPV8% utilizes less than 3% of Viken's total resource footprint**, leaving astronomical multi-generational upside for Phase 2+ expansions using shared initial infrastructure.
**3. Socio-Economic Impact Study (EIS Results)**
Following the PEA, DMX released an independent Economic Impact Study (EIS) by BDO Canada LLP evaluating Phase 1:
**Total Economic Contribution:** **US$ 7.66 Billion** (74.33 Billion SEK), with **US$ 7.63 Billion** directly accruing to Sweden.
**State & Local Tax Revenues:** **US$ 1.58 Billion** in direct corporate income taxes + **US$ 199.6M** in employment taxes.
**Job Creation:** Supporting **\~1,065 direct and indirect full-time jobs** in Sweden.
**Local Landowner Fees:** **US$ 21.9 Million** in State Mineral Fees directly paid to local property owners.
**4. Key Macro Catalysts & Regulatory Environment**
**SGU "National Interest" (*****Riksintresse*****) Status:**
A critical legal catalyst centers on the Geological Survey of Sweden (SGU) designating Viken as a National Interest for valuable minerals under Swedish environmental law (*Miljöbalken*). This status legally prioritizes the deposit over competing land uses, granting strong state-level protection, smoothing municipal zoning conflicts, and giving DMX significant legal backing during the Exploitation Concession (*Bearbetningskoncession*) process.
**Sweden's Energy Policy Shift:** The Swedish government continues advancing legislation to expand nuclear capacity and re-evaluate the historical moratorium on uranium mining to secure national energy independence.
**EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA):** Viken is not just a uranium play; its polymetallic nature (vanadium, nickel, copper, zinc) aligns directly with the EU's mandates. Achieving National Interest status in Sweden streamlines Viken’s potential recognition as an **EU Strategic Project**, unlocking fast-tracked permitting timelines and European strategic funding.
**5. Valuation & Market Asymmetry**
Despite holding an asset with a **US$ 2.88B NPV8%** on just 3% of its deposit, DMX trades at a modest micro-cap valuation. The market currently prices in regulatory discount and development risk regarding Swedish mining permits. Any concrete legislative progress, formal lifting of uranium restrictions, or SGU National Interest consolidation acts as an immediate, high-multiplier re-rating catalyst for the stock.
**6. Key Risks to Consider**
**Permitting & Regulatory Risk:** Development hinges on Swedish legislative votes regarding Alum Shale and uranium mining regulations, as well as municipal consent.
**Financing Risk:** Initial CapEx (US$ 876M) will require significant strategic partnering, government grants/loans, or joint-venture dilution.
**Commodity Price Volatility:** Project economics depend on sustained strength in spot/term uranium and energy metal pricing.

FY26 accounts for the acquisitions. 20% growth from FY25 looks reasonable and consistent with my thesis (it would undershoot if you think Celsius continues to grow significantly - which I dont).
On your point about margins expanding as growth decelerates, this is unequivocally untrue. Margins CAN expand as a company enters maturity (ex. Monster energy), but that's not a hard and fast rule. Quite often the opposite happens. in this scenario, my thesis is accounting for increased competition (specifically in the consumer wellness energy drink market) and if Kirkland executes, more supply will push equilibrium prices down.
Finally... on your point about growth deceleration and margin compression making any company look bad.. again this is untrue. I have a portfolio of over 30 companies, each with similar revenue growth tapers and margin compression baked into the model. and they all indicate significant discounts to intrinsic value with very attractive multi year IRR's.

I am not saying my thesis is the only viable one, but it is a scenario that could play out and that I personally think is most likely.
But to play devils advocate, even if I bump Revenue growth up to 35% to reflect your comment and then continue my taper from that point on, it's still not attractively priced and only generates a 2.7% 5-year IRR.
||FY2026|FY2027|FY2028|FY2029|FY2030|FY2031|FY2032|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Revenue|$3,396|$3,905|$4,374|$4,767|$5,125|$5,483|$5,840|
|Revenue Growth %|35%|15%|12%|9%|7.50%|7%|6.50%|
|OCF Margin %|14.50%|14%|13.50%|13.50%|13.50%|13%|13%|
|Free Cash Flow|$443|$492|$531|$583|$630|$649|$691|
|Intrinsic Value / Share (USD)|$30|$31|$30|$32|$33|$34|$35|

When I started my deep dive into Celsius holdings, I was very much expecting the output to indicate a quality company trading at attractive prices.
As I learnt about the company, I started liking them more and more. However, when I finally completed my model, I was surprised to see just how much growth was priced into expectations prior to the 45% collapse, and how even at these compressed prices, Celsius does not indicate a quality investment.
Obviously, they could outperform on both growth and margins, but I tend to lean more conservative in my assumptions. Especially when they have already reached the 2nd highest market share (behind Red Bull) in combination with the industry itself only expected to grow at about 6.50%, and finally a more competitive environment with large players like Costco entering the field
at about $29/share, I view the company at about 10 - 15% over valued with a 7-year IRR (expected return) of about 0%.
Today I am uninterested, but should the stock continue to fall, I could be enticed to initiate a position!
You can find my post with the growth/margin assumptions below.
let me know what you think!

[Celsius Holdings - growth gone awry — EquityForge](https://equityforge.ca/post_view.php?id=4)
Snapshot of Assumptions Below:
||FY2026|FY2027|FY2028|FY2029|FY2030|FY2031|FY2032|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Revenue|$3,018|$3,471|$3,888|$4,237|$4,555|$4,874|$5,191|
|Revenue Growth %|20%|15%|12%|9%|7.50%|7%|6.50%|
|Diluted Shares (M)|268|277|285|294|300|306|312|
|Operating Cash Flow|$438|$486|$525|$572|$615|$634|$675|
|OCF Margin %|14.50%|14%|13.50%|13.50%|13.50%|13%|13%|
|CapEx|$44|$49|$53|$54|$55|$57|$61|
|Total Debt|$723|$729|$656|$543|$492|$412|$270|
|Intrinsic Value / Share (USD)|$27|$28|$27|$29|$30|$31|$32|
|Implied P/FCF Multiple|18.4|17.6|16.4|16.2|15.9|16.2|16|

The xirr includes all the stocks that you have holded in your portfolio.. whether they are sold or are still part of your portfolio.
So if you get an IPO and book listing gains of 35% on opening date, the returns you generate will be factored in your XIRR of that FY and beyond..
tbh, to judge a stock portfolio based on XIRR where there is very high turnover/churning is difficult and inconsistent. In that case absolute returns from a specific stock or CAGR is better metric. But if you get in for long term, XIRR or IRR is a great metric cuz it measures rolling returns.

In the middle of a deep dive into this guy and TGN.
His director fee is peanuts, like $100k. But...​Tan Sri Dato’ David Law Tien Seng (often referred to as T.S. Law) is a prominent Malaysian mining, steel, and property tycoon. Net worth estimated at over US$200M.
Even then, putting A$11.5M (4% of his net worth) into a single, relatively illiquid, small cap seems unusual.
TGN released a positive economic study of their Watershed project in late June, just before this cat bought his shares. GWR also referenced this in their quarterly because they own a stake in TGN. (And a few common directors)
> Tungsten Mining reported that it had completed the Watershed Project
Preliminary Economic Evaluation study with a pre-tax NPV of A$1.31
billion, 198% IRR and nine-month payback

Total Return, Lump sum from 2016, rank is:
CBC 118%
BDO 93.5%
MBT 58.4%
BPI 49.5%
In other backtests ive done, 10 year DCA on MBT is 13% IRR.

OP’s question isn’t silly.
AMZN, MSFT, and GOOG have run quite a bit, so I wouldn’t pull the trigger here. But buying a stock below its fair value once the market has gotten interested in it can result in a better IRR (even if you’re investing long term).
In this case, Morningstar lists a fair value of:
$600 for MSFT
$433 for GOOG
$300 for AMZN
I wouldn’t take these values blindly… but all three look undervalued still, less so AMZN and more so MSFT.
However, when you have a pump like this it can easily fall back significantly — I’d personally add only if it pulls back but holds at a place of strength. For example Google pulled back precisely to the 200 day moving average at $318. On great earnings. As it bounced there I started buying, at $318 - $320, and kept adding into the mid $330s. I’d personally be tempted to add if it draws back but shows strength somewhere above $330.
Here’s the chart where you can see the perfect bounce (twice) off the 200-day moving average:
https://imgur.com/a/OmtYYBf
I digress with these technicals, this is a value investing sub. But I do think paying attention to the technicals can improve your value investing returns. Plus I’ve lost a lot more money buying value stocks as they fall than I have buying value stocks on the way up.