Samsung SDI 3Q26 Review: A Strong Quarter and It Beat the Index, But I’m Holding Off on Adding

Samsung SDI series: Part 1 · Part 2 · Part 3 · 3Q26 Review
🇰🇷 한국어 원문 · Originally written in Korean on Nov 1, 2026.

As of the October 30 close, Samsung SDI (006400.KS) traded at ₩535,000, for a market cap of ₩43.11tn.

When I posted my three-part series on Samsung SDI on October 13, I wrote, “When 3Q26 results come out, let’s compare them with this piece.”
Results came out on October 29. As promised, here is the comparison.

3Q26 operating profit was ₩407.8bn.
That is 57% above the broker estimates I cited (₩257.5bn-259.0bn).
Against consensus at the time (₩131.8bn-141.5bn), it is about 3x.

On the numbers alone, it was a surprise.
Yet the next day the stock closed at ₩535,000, 0.7% below the prior close (₩539,000).
My guess is that this was mostly the market-wide correction.

In the October correction, KOSPI fell 16.2%, while Samsung SDI rose 4.3%.

The bottom line first

1) The direction was right. But I underestimated the speed.
ESS orders passed 60GWh by October, and the SPE (US) and Ulsan lines are booked through 2028.

2) The “quality of earnings” problem is still there.
The company did not disclose the size of the one-off items.
The low end of broker estimates for 4Q26 is smaller than AMPC alone.

3) Earnings upgrades were again concentrated in the current year.
2026F rose 30%, but 2027F rose only 2%.

4) Technically, the rebound is confirmed, but the breakout failed.

So of my four checkpoints: one met (on broker estimates), one near breakeven, one not yet verifiable, and one missed.
In my view, this is not yet the place to meaningfully increase the position.

1. Scoring the Four Checkpoints From Part 2

In Part 2, I listed four things to check in 3Q26.
Here is how each one scores.

① Did work-in-process inventory come down? Not verifiable yet
The preliminary earnings release and the conference call had no inventory figures.
We will only know once the 3Q report comes out (expected mid-November).
WIP was ₩1.86tn in 2Q26. That is the baseline.

② Did ESS revenue grow ~30%? Met on broker estimates (company did not disclose)
The company only said that “ESS and BBU sales increased significantly.”
Post-results broker estimates put it at +30-40% QoQ: iM about +30%, Hana +39%, SK volumes +40% or more.
Instead, the company guided to “substantial growth” in 4Q26 ESS revenue.
iM expects 4Q26 ESS revenue of ₩1.9tn (+67% QoQ), surpassing automotive batteries for the first time.

③ Is profit ex-compensation and ex-AMPC positive? Near breakeven, amounts undisclosed
In Part 1, I wrote that taking compensation (~₩150bn) and AMPC (₩103.5bn) out of the 3Q26 estimate left about ₩4bn, i.e. breakeven.

Actual AMPC was ₩122.5bn.
That is 18% more than the figure I used (₩103.5bn).

Using the same method:
₩407.8bn – AMPC ₩122.5bn – compensation ₩150bn = ₩135.3bn
That is more than ₩130bn above my earlier calculation (₩4bn).

But the ₩150bn compensation figure was NH’s pre-results estimate, and it is smaller than post-results estimates.
After the release, brokers put total compensation at ₩300bn-500bn (Eugene, Kiwoom, iM), and the net one-off gain after quality provisions at ₩200bn-400bn (Daishin ₩200bn, SK and IBK ₩250bn, iM ₩300bn-400bn).
With those numbers, profit ex-AMPC lands between -₩114.7bn and +₩85.3bn. At the midpoint (SK/IBK, ₩250bn) it is about ₩35bn.
That range could be a profit or a loss.

SK and IBK concluded the business was “profitable even ex-one-offs / core recovery.” But both included AMPC. IBK put the core business at about ₩150bn after removing ₩250bn of one-offs, and SK noted that ESS is loss-making without AMPC.
Stripping out AMPC as well, Daishin estimates the battery division at around breakeven.
So I call it “near breakeven” rather than “profitable.” It may not be far from the ₩4bn (breakeven) I wrote in Part 1.

④ Are 2027F+ earnings estimates rising too? Missed
FnGuide operating profit consensus, from the time of Part 2 (10/8) → 10/31

2026F: ₩446.3bn → ₩578.2bn (+29.6%)
2027F: ₩1.495tn → ₩1.525tn (+2.0%)
2028F: ₩2.605tn → ₩2.750tn (+5.5%)

The 2026F upgrade is ₩131.9bn.
That is about the same size as the pre-results compensation estimate (₩150bn).
The pattern I flagged in Part 2, with this year’s one-offs getting priced in rather than future earnings, showed up once more.

The delta did improve.
Delta (2028F growth – 2027F growth): -160.7%p → -83.5%p
(recalculated with 2027F +163.8% and 2028F +80.3%)

But much of that comes from a 2026F base inflated by one-offs, which lowers 2027F growth.
Most of the improvement is 2027F growth falling from 235% to 164%.
It looks good, but it is not a high-quality improvement.

2. What I Got Right, What I Got Wrong

Right: EV got worse
In Part 1, I wrote that EV was the problem.
Excluding the compensation effect, 3Q automotive battery revenue fell 15-19% QoQ (SK -15%, iM about -19%; company did not disclose).
European plant utilization is in the 50% range.
SDI’s share within key customers has fallen to 12% at BMW and 3% at Stellantis.
Daishin and IBK expect the automotive battery division to lose ₩124.0bn-135.1bn in 4Q26.

Right: US LFP mass production in 4Q26
In Part 1, I wrote that mass production on the Indiana LFP line in 4Q26 would lift ESS revenue 50-60%.
The company said SPE’s first LFP line started mass production in early October, with finished systems (SBB) shipping from December.
Two more lines will be converted starting in 1H27.

Wrong: the pace of orders
My series covered two US ESS contracts (a reported ~₩3tn deal with Tesla, and ~₩1.5tn with a US energy company).
But cumulative ESS orders through October exceeded 60GWh.
On the conference call, the company set a target of 120GWh+ cumulative by year-end (per Shinhan, iM, IBK, Yuanta and Hana reports; there is no company filing with the original wording).
SPE and Ulsan have already secured enough volume to run at full capacity through 2028, and the company is now taking orders for 2029 and beyond.

In Part 2, I wrote that advances from customers fell 44%, from ₩1.09tn to ₩0.61tn, and that there was no “next stage” signal.
Inventory and advances figures are not out yet,
but judging by orders, the next-stage signal has effectively arrived.
This is where I was too conservative. I’ll own that.

The balance sheet improved
SDI used part of the proceeds from selling a 5% stake in Samsung Display (~₩4.45tn) to repay debt.
Debt-to-equity: 78% → 67%
3Q capex was ₩926.4bn.

But equity-method income turned to a ₩35.8bn loss.
In 1H, equity-method income (₩516.4bn) was larger than pre-tax income.
3Q pre-tax income was ₩261.5bn, ₩146.3bn below operating profit.
The situation I described in Part 1, “as equity-method income shrinks, core earnings matter more,” arrived sooner than I expected.

3. Revisiting Price and the Trading Plan

My Part 3 reference price was ₩567,000 (October 9 close).
The October 30 close is ₩535,000.
That is -5.6% since Part 3.

Looking at the path in between shows what would have happened had I followed the plan.

1st pullback (₩530,000-550,000, 30%): reached the entry zone with a ₩525,000 close on October 15
2nd pullback (₩490,000-510,000, 30%): passed through the entry zone with a ₩484,500 close on October 23
Stop (₩457,000 close): lowest close ₩484,000 (10/26), 5.9% above the stop
Breakout add (₩597,000 close): the high was a ₩596,000 close on October 14, before results. Not reached after results.

Had I followed the plan, I would have bought 60% at an average of about ₩520,000. But in an unusually rough correction, I didn’t dare to.
I’m currently down about 6%.

Will I be able to buy more at the breakout, as planned? Having gone through this review, my thinking is that at the very least I shouldn’t sell.

Flows went differently from what I wrote in Part 3.
Cumulative net buying, 10/13-10/29 (shares × closing price, estimated)
Foreigners: -₩478.4bn
Institutions: +₩264.8bn
Retail: +₩198.5bn

Foreign ownership is 24.55%.
It has moved further from the 26.7% I treated as a breakout signal in Part 3.
The breakout condition of “institutions and foreigners buying together” has not been met.

Broker target prices have moved up.
Average: ₩741,000 (19 brokers) → ₩785,000 (18 brokers) (+6.0%)
Low: ₩402,000 → ₩650,000
High: ₩1,000,000 → ₩1,100,000 (Daol)

The average target is 47% above the current price. (78.5 / 53.5 = 1.47)
But most of the target upgrades rest on orders and 2027-2028 ESS.
The 2027F consensus upgrade (+2.0%) and the target price upgrade (+6.0%) differ.
That means the multiple is moving up first.

4. The October Correction vs. the Market

October was a month when the whole market broke down.
KOSPI fell 21.9%, from 7,004 on October 2 to 5,469 on October 26.
KOSDAQ also fell 21.3% from its October 6 high through October 30.

October performance (9/30 → 10/30)
Samsung SDI: +4.3% (₩513,000 → ₩535,000)
KOSPI: -16.2%
KOSDAQ: -15.4%
Battery ETF (KODEX Secondary Battery Industry): -6.5%
LG Energy Solution: -0.8%

Bottom line first: Samsung SDI held up 20%p better than the market.
Even measured from my Part 3 reference date (10/8), it was down 5.6%, 7.9%p ahead of KOSPI (-13.5%) and 13.2%p ahead of KOSDAQ (-18.8%).

The pace of the post-results rebound was different, too.
From the 10/26 low, Samsung SDI rose 10.5% and KOSPI rose 4.8%.
KOSDAQ fell 0.4% over the same period and set a new October low on 10/30.

It couldn’t avoid the market decline itself, but it rebounded on its own news. One caution, though: on days without a specific catalyst like an earnings release, it tended to fall along with the market.

5. Technical Analysis, Revisited (as of 10/30)

Three weeks have passed since Part 3, so I recalculated the indicators.
The reference is the October 30 close of ₩535,000.

Momentum has tilted from neutral toward a rebound.
RSI(14,6) is 50.2 and crossed above its signal line (46.4) on 10/27.
The MACD oscillator (12,26,9) is -2,467, still below zero. But it has risen four days in a row, improving by 4,608 over five days.

Checked against the conditions I set in Part 3,
the pullback-rebound condition (RSI crossing above its signal, oscillator’s negative reading shrinking) is met.
The breakout condition (oscillator above zero and rising) is not yet.
Another concern: both RSI and MACD still show a bearish divergence over the past 60 days (higher price highs, lower indicator highs).

Price is wedged between moving averages.
It is below the 20-day MA (₩541,500), and above the 60-day (₩523,500) and 120-day (₩524,000).
Within the Bollinger Bands (₩479,000-604,000), it sits in the middle (%b 0.45).
The 120-day trend channel has been a downward channel sloping about -17% a year since the April 30 intraday high (₩723,000). It is too early to say the stock has broken out of it.

Volume leans slightly toward buyers.
The 20-day average volume is 1.30x the 60-day average.
Over the past 60 days, up-day volume was 1.29x down-day volume, and the 20-day OBV rose.

The most important factor is the volume profile.
There is a heavy cluster of traded volume at ₩540,000-560,000, just above the current price.

Why does that matter?
The price with the most trading in the 90-day volume profile (POC) is ₩546,000-557,000.
Based on one-year cumulative net buying, the estimated average cost is ₩547,000 for foreigners, ₩538,000 for institutions and ₩541,000 for retail.
All three groups are around breakeven or slightly underwater near the current price. That means there is a pile of shares in this zone whose holders want out once they get back to even.

Here are the updated support and resistance levels.
Resistance 3: ₩604,000-620,000. Thin trading in the one-year volume profile. A break above could run quickly to ₩652,000.
Resistance 2: ₩578,000-597,000. Top of the 90-day volume profile, the 10/14 closing high (₩596,000), and the breakout-buy trigger (₩597,000).
Resistance 1: ₩541,000-557,000. Where the 20-day MA, foreign and institutional average cost, and the 90-day POC overlap.
Support 1: ₩518,000-531,000. Dense zone in the one-year volume profile, the 60- and 120-day MAs. Overlaps the 1st pullback zone.
Support 2: ₩479,000-488,000. Dense zone in the 90-day profile, the 10/26 lowest close (₩484,000), and the lower Bollinger Band. This is the 2nd pullback zone.
Support 3: ₩453,000-457,000. Bottom of the 90-day volume profile, the stop level.

On flows, the pattern of foreigners selling and institutions buying continues.
Over the last 20 trading days (through 10/29), foreigners were net sellers of ₩434.5bn and institutions net buyers of ₩447.4bn (shares × closing price, estimated).
Foreign ownership is 24.55% and keeps sliding from its one-year high (26.7%, 6/19).
The last piece of the breakout puzzle, “foreigners turning to net buyers,” is still missing.

The technical conclusion is “rebound confirmed, breakout not confirmed.”
So I am not changing the trading plan.
First, I want to see the stock settle above ₩557,000 on a closing basis, then ₩597,000.
If it breaks below ₩518,000 on a close, I leave room for a retest of the ₩480,000s.

6. Scoring the Part 3 Scenarios

I checked the conditions of the 12-month scenarios from Part 3 one by one.

Bull (₩800,000) conditions: profitable ex-one-offs, WIP converting into revenue, upgrades to 2027-28F estimates
– Result: near breakeven ex-AMPC, WIP unconfirmed, 2027F upgrade a marginal +2.0%

Base (₩650,000-700,000) conditions: quarterly profits continue, EV losses continue, overhead supply near the highs gets absorbed
– Result: guidance for continued profits, EV losses expected to widen, overhead supply still being absorbed

Bear (₩450,000) conditions: loss ex-one-offs, ESS price competition, estimate cuts
– Result: no estimate cuts; judging by orders, price-competition concerns have eased

Orders moved toward the bull case, and quality of earnings toward the base case. Overall, we are still within the base scenario.
Two of the arguments for the bear case have weakened.

7. New Scenarios (12 Months, Reference Price ₩535,000)

I rebuilt them to reflect 3Q26.
The probabilities and prices are my own judgment.

Bull 25%: ₩850,000 (+59%)
– Cumulative ESS orders reach 120GWh by year-end, 4Q26 profitable ex-AMPC, 2027F operating profit consensus raised to ₩2tn or more
– A “power infrastructure company” multiple (EV/EBITDA 12x or higher) takes hold

Base 55%: ₩620,000-700,000 (+16-31%)
– Orders of 90-120GWh, 4Q26 operating profit of ₩100bn-270bn (still profitable), 2027F consensus around ₩1.5tn
– EV losses remain, and it becomes clear that ESS generates most of the profit

Bear 20%: ₩450,000 (-16%)
– The 3Q report shows rising WIP inventory, and repeated quality provisions in 4Q26 mean a loss ex-AMPC
– Tighter US 48E/FEOC rules or order delays lead to 2027F cuts

The probability-weighted expected price is about ₩666,000.
(0.25×85 + 0.55×66 + 0.20×45, using the midpoint for the base case)
That is +24% from the current price.

The expected price in Part 3 was ₩650,000 (+15%).
The stock has come down and the expected price has gone up, so the risk/reward is better than at Part 3.

Why not raise the bull probability further?
4Q26 broker operating profit estimates range 2.6x, from ₩104.6bn (Kiwoom) to ₩271.0bn (Eugene).
4Q26 AMPC estimates are ₩188.1bn-219.0bn (iM), ₩207.6bn (SK) and ₩216.0bn (Yuanta).
If the low end is right, the company is back to a loss ex-AMPC.
The “first quarter without one-offs” is 4Q26, and that is the real test.

8. Trading Plan Update

Now, at ₩535,000: keep the 60% the plan called for. Hold off on adding.
Breakout add, 40%: close above ₩597,000 + volume 1.5x normal + institutions and foreigners buying together. Conditions unchanged.
Stop: keep the ₩457,000 close (the same level as the bear-case price).

Now that 3Q26 results have been confirmed, the first half of breakout condition #1 is satisfied.
What remains is price and flows.

I am adding one more checkpoint.
Close settles above ₩557,000: a sign that the overhead supply at foreign and institutional average cost has been absorbed. I’ll read it together with the MACD oscillator getting back above zero.
Close breaks below ₩518,000: the 60- and 120-day MAs give way. I leave room for a retest of the 2nd pullback zone (₩490,000-510,000).

For reference, the 20-day average volume is now 1.30x the 60-day average.
At Part 3 it was 0.83x.
I wrote that direction emerges after contraction; for now, it looks like the stock shook out to the downside once and came back up.

What to Watch Next

• Mid-November 3Q report: WIP inventory (baseline ₩1.86tn), customer advances (baseline ₩0.61tn), segment profit, notes on compensation and provisions
• Year-end cumulative ESS orders: whether they go from 60GWh to 120GWh, and any long-term supply contract filings
• 4Q26 results (late January): the sign of profit ex-AMPC, the size of automotive battery losses
• 2027F operating profit consensus: whether it moves from ₩1.5tn
• US 48E, 45X and FEOC rule changes

My conclusion: orders came faster than I thought, but quality of earnings still has to be proven in 4Q26.
Holding up better than the market in October does not resolve the quality-of-earnings question.

Disclosure: I have a long position in Samsung SDI (006400.KS). This is a personal investment journal, not investment advice. Scenario probabilities and price levels are my own judgment. Do your own due diligence.

---

Broker reports cited (Oct 30, 2026, in Korean)

• Kiwoom Securities, “Expectations persist as profitability holds”: PDF
• IBK Securities, “ESS changes the direction of earnings”: PDF
• SK Securities, “Differentiated from domestic peers with prismatic LFP”: PDF
• iM Securities, “Strong confidence in ESS!”: PDF
• Daishin Securities, “There is more upside”: PDF
• Shinhan Securities, “ESS leads, new businesses add”: PDF
• Yuanta Securities, “3Q26 Review: Strong results, more to look forward to”: PDF
• Eugene Investment & Securities, “Excellent results and expectations for the future”: PDF
• Hana Securities, “Rapidly rising new orders”: PDF
• Mirae Asset Securities, “Double, double, double. Starting to take share from China”: PDF