Planet Labs PBC (PL)
NYSEIndustrialsAerospace & DefenseSnapshot 2026-09-04
$18.12-1.25%
Close 2026-09-04 · 1-day change
NYSEIndustrialsAerospace & DefenseSnapshot 2026-09-04
QuarterlyIQ Insights · PL
Price, fair value, and the multiples that frame it on the same time axis. Scroll over the price chart to zoom.
Daily closes. Earnings/event dots inline.
A consensus fair price across our valuation methods, at three horizons. As of 2026-09-04. Estimates are diagnostics, not price targets. Short-horizon estimates are close to coin-flips, so confidence is a method-agreement read, not a prediction.
No fair value published
Our valuation methods disagree too much on this name right now. Rather than print a number we don't believe, we're holding it back until they converge.
This applies to all three horizons. The trailing multiples, peer comparison, and quality and trajectory reads on this page are unaffected. Names move in and out of this state day to day as the methods converge or diverge. Method agreement on this name is low.
Bottom 25% on quality vs scored peers
No fair value is published for this name, so there is no number to grade. What the market pays, and the growth that price implies, are still measured below.
At $18 PL trades at 17× p/s, above its 3.3× p/s peer median (0.7× its own history). We're not publishing a fair value for PL right now: our valuation methods disagree too much on this name to stand behind a single number. Analysts target $22–$53. Not investment advice.
One valuation read at a 12-month horizon, plus how price compares to peers and the company's own history.
The price sits about 3% below a flat-multiple fair value, while analysts forecast about 42% growth — below our forecast. This describes what's priced in, not a forecast of the move.
TTM earnings are negative, so the read leans on sales- and cash-flow-based methods rather than P/E. This is a data condition, not a forward call.
Score 100 = cheapest in the cohort, 0 = richest. Bars are filled left-to-right based on the peer-relative score (or PEG/self-history where shown).
Each method's implied share price per horizon. Provisional rows use a projected (historical-CAGR) growth input rather than analyst or management guidance.
These are the individual method outputs, not a fair value. Their spread is why no consensus fair value is published for this name right now.
| Method | Horizon | Est. price | Multiple | Per-share input | EPS source | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| analyst target | 12M | $42.50 | — | — | Analyst | low |
| Peer P/FCF | 12M | $3.98 | 30.4 | 0.13 | TTM | low |
| Peer P/S | 12M | $3.47 | 3.3 | 1.05 | TTM | low |
| Peer P/S | 3Y | $6.54 | 3.3 | 1.98 | guidance | medium |
A “consensus-then vs. actual-now” overlay is on the way — what our valuation estimate said on a past date versus where the price actually landed.
Not investment advice. Scores describe historical and current data; they are not forecasts of future returns. Consult a licensed advisor before making investment decisions.
Direction of the business behind the multiple. Bands are backend reads; trailing-12-month basis.
TTM earnings are negative. P/E-based methods drop out and the estimate leans on sales- and cash-flow-based methods. A data condition, not a forward call.
$22.00 – $53.00 (median $40.00) · 11 analysts · as of 2026-09-04
No fragility gates fired. Regime (Mania) does not concentrate fragility.
For similar setups historically (n=20,154): about 33% saw a 20%+ drawdown, and roughly 76% of those did not recover within the year. These are historical base rates for the cohort, not a forecast of this stock.
Looks more expensive than peers.
Self-history needs ~20 months of data.
Trailing four: 2026-Q2, 2026-Q3, 2027-Q1, 2027-Q2
Direction of the business behind the multiple. Bands are backend reads; trailing-12-month basis.
| Peer P/S | 5Y | $8.57 | 3.3 | 2.60 | guidance | medium |