---
endpoint: analytics
pattern: Technology
status: done
latency_ms: 187625
conversation_id: cb871e3d-51fe-4028-a55c-115d77cbe92a
citations: 12
created: 2026-05-31 21:23:04Z
---

# Is CLSA incrementally more positive/negative on LG Energy Solution. If so, why?

**Short answer: No — CLSA is NOT incrementally more positive or more negative on LG Energy Solution (LGES, 373220 KS). Their stance has effectively held flat between the two most recent dedicated notes (Jan and May 2025): Underperform maintained, target price unchanged at ₩330,000, and the investment-thesis language is nearly word-for-word identical. The only material change is a transfer of coverage (analyst change) from Dohyoung Kim to Dong Cheol Shin in May, plus the implicit dropping of the "US election" risk line now that the election has passed.**

The CLSA corpus's latest LGES-dedicated note is the **16 May 2025 "Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage)"**, so "latest" for this comparison is mid-May 2025.

## Then vs. Now — side-by-side

| Item | 26 Jan 2025 — "Exercising caution" | 16 May 2025 — "Transfer of coverage" | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rating | Underperform (U-PF) [6] | Underperform (U-PF) [1] | **Unchanged** |
| Target price | ₩330,000 (DCF-based) [9] | ₩330,000 (DCF-based) [1] | **Unchanged** |
| Current price at note date | ₩353,500 (24 Jan 2025) [9] | ₩290,500 (16 May 2025) [1] | Stock down ~18% |
| Implied potential return | -7% [9] | +14% (₩330k vs ₩290.5k) | TP gap inverted but rating not upgraded |
| Lead analyst | Dohyoung Kim [9] | Dong Cheol Shin (team-structure transfer) [2] | New analyst, same call |
| DCF methodology | Pure EV-battery play; NOPAT excludes US AMPC; 50% policy-risk discount on AMPC credits [10] | Identical: pure EV play; NOPAT excludes AMPC; 50% AMPC policy discount [5] | **Unchanged** |
| Upside risks called out | Sector rotation flows (batteries are underweight) + strong EV demand (20%+) in 2025 [12] | Sector rotation flows + strong EV demand (20%+) in 2025 [3] | **Identical wording** |

## Why the call hasn't moved

The cautious thesis itself is essentially copy-paste between the two notes. Both versions say risks around slower EV penetration and delivery delays are "more or less priced in," but CLSA still sees downside to 2025 consensus operating profit and therefore believes the negatives are not fully priced in [8][4]. The only sentence that disappeared in May is the "US election poses a policy risk depending on the outcome" line, which is now retrospective — not a thesis change, just a calendar event having passed.

Drivers of the cautious-but-unchanged stance:

- **2025 revenue guidance was light** — LGES guided 5–10% revenue growth for 2025, below the ~14% consensus. CLSA flagged AMPC-eligible volume guidance of 45–50GWh as aggressive (implying ~50% YoY shipment growth) [6].
- **Policy / subsidy risk** — CLSA repeatedly highlighted the risk of the US $7,500 EV subsidy being cut/removed under Trump, with EV demand potentially overshooting to the downside post-cut [6][7].
- **CLSA estimates sit below the Street** — In Jan 2025, CLSA's 2025 OP was ₩2,152bn vs. Bloomberg consensus ₩2,310bn (-6.8%); 2026 OP ₩3,446bn vs. consensus ₩4,440bn (-22.4%); 2026 revenue ~17% below consensus [11]. These below-consensus numbers underpin the "downside to 2025 consensus OP" view that is repeated unchanged in the May note [4].
- **DCF math is essentially the same** — In Jan 2025, the "old" and "new" DCF builds both produced ₩330,000 rounded TP (terminal value ~₩127–128tn, enterprise value ~₩77–79tn, AMPC add-back ~₩6.2tn at 50% discount) [10]. The May transfer note reuses the same DCF framework and the same ₩330,000 TP [1][5].

## The one subtlety worth flagging

While the rating hasn't budged, the **mechanical implied return has flipped** from -7% to roughly +14% because the stock fell ~18% between Jan 24 and May 16 while CLSA left the TP at ₩330,000. If CLSA were applying their own rating-threshold definitions consistently, a ~+14% potential return would normally not sit at Underperform — it suggests the desk is signaling that either (a) the TP itself is overdue for a downward revision, or (b) they expect further share-price weakness before any rating change. The May note does not explicitly resolve this — it simply re-affirms U-PF and asks the reader to take the cautious framing at face value [4]. This is something to clarify with the analyst on a next call.

## Bottom line

CLSA's view on LGES has **not** become incrementally more positive or more negative between January and May 2025. The rating (U-PF), target price (₩330,000), DCF methodology (pure-EV DCF with 50% AMPC haircut for policy risk), bear case (downside to 2025 consensus OP; subsidy/policy risk), and listed upside risks (sector-rotation flows + ≥20% EV demand) all match across the two notes. The only changes are administrative (coverage transferred to Dong Cheol Shin) and contextual (the US election risk line is no longer forward-looking).

---
**Sources**
[1] Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage) — CLSA (16 May 2025) — Rating/TP table — 607959725LinqAlpha.PDF
[2] Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage) — CLSA (16 May 2025) — Transfer rationale — 607959725LinqAlpha.PDF
[3] Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage) — CLSA (16 May 2025) — Investment risks (LGES) — 607959725LinqAlpha.PDF
[4] Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage) — CLSA (16 May 2025) — Investment thesis (LGES) — 607959725LinqAlpha.PDF
[5] Korea EVs (Transfer of coverage) — CLSA (16 May 2025) — Valuation details (LGES) — 607959725LinqAlpha.PDF
[6] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — 2025 guidance & U-PF reiteration — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[7] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — Maintain Underperform / AMPC 45-50GWh — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[8] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — Investment thesis — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[9] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — Cover/ticker box ₩330,000 TP, -7% — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[10] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — DCF detail (old) ₩330k TP — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[11] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — CLSA vs. Bloomberg consensus table — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF
[12] LG Energy Solution — U-PF (Exercising caution) — CLSA (26 Jan 2025) — Post-subsidy-cut volatility — 607949022LinqAlpha.PDF

## Citations

- [1] **607959725LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/05/607959725LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [2] **607959725LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/05/607959725LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [3] **607959725LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/05/607959725LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [4] **607959725LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/05/607959725LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [5] **607959725LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/05/607959725LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [6] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [7] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [8] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [9] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [10] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [11] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>
- [12] **607949022LinqAlpha.PDF** · clsa — <s3://ext-linq-rms-clsa/2025/01/607949022LinqAlpha.PDF>

