Elis: Disclosure of trading in own shares occured from June 2 to June 6, 2025
Disclosure of trading in own shares occurred from June 2 to June 6, 2025
Saint-Cloud, June 9, 2025
In accordance with the regulations on share buybacks, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/1052, Elis hereby declares the purchases of its own shares made from June 2 to June 6, 2025 under the buyback program authorized by the 24th resolution of the General Shareholders' Meeting of May 22, 2025 and announced on March 6, 2025:
Aggregated presentation:
Issuer name
Issuer code(LEI)
Transaction date
ISIN Code
Daily total Volume (in number of shares)
Daily weighted average price of shares acquired (in euros)
Platform (MIC Code)
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/02/2025
FR0012435121
18,598
23.8024
XPAR
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/02/2025
FR0012435121
17,104
23.7620
DXE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/03/2025
FR0012435121
51,714
23.4968
XPAR
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/03/2025
FR0012435121
6,151
23.4011
DXE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/03/2025
FR0012435121
819
23.3894
TQE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/03/2025
FR0012435121
716
23.3504
AQE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/04/2025
FR0012435121
29,492
23.5757
XPAR
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/04/2025
FR0012435121
19,680
23.5711
DXE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/05/2025
FR0012435121
23,990
23.4805
XPAR
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/05/2025
FR0012435121
6,119
23.4500
DXE
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/06/2025
FR0012435121
18,131
23.5994
XPAR
ELIS SA
969500UX71LCE8MAY492
06/06/2025
FR0012435121
7,032
23.5599
DXE
Total
199,546
23.5713
The purpose of the own shares purchase operations is (i) to cover maturing performance share plans and to allocate free shares to employees as part of the contribution to the Elis for All 2025 international employee shareholding plan, and (ii) to be cancelled in accordance with the 26th resolution of the Combined General Meeting of May 22, 2025.
Contacts
Nicolas BuronDirector of Investor Relations, Financing & TreasuryPhone: + 33 (0)1 75 49 98 30 - nicolas.buron@elis.com
Charline LefaucheuxInvestor Relations Phone: + 33 (0)1 75 49 98 15 - charline.lefaucheux@elis.com
Attachment
Elis - Disclosure of trading in own shares occured from June 2 to June 6, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
40 minutes ago
- Forbes
A European Perspective: Why Digital Sovereignty Concerns Us All
Prof. Dr. Dennis-Kenji Kipker is a cyber security expert and works as Scientific Director of the getty There are countless definitions of what constitutes digital sovereignty: Some define it politically, and others define it technically. Then, there are legal and sociocultural attempts to define it. And that makes sense, because digitalization affects all areas of life, society and the economy. That is why this article will not attempt to define the entire possible spectrum of digital sovereignty, because that would be boring. Instead, my aim is to identify specific reasons for the lack of digital sovereignty to date and consider how we can work together to find a way out of this dilemma. Here are just two examples of a lack of digital sovereignty: When President Donald Trump announced that he will make changes to the transatlantic data protection agreement between the EU and the United States—and we in the European Union had to consider what consequences this could have for our economy—I do not believe that is digital sovereignty. Or, when Vice President JD Vance stated in February 2025 that the European Union is digitally overregulated—and the EU Commission then considered reducing European data protection by reforming the GDPR—I do not believe that is digital sovereignty, either. To me, sovereignty therefore means being able to decide freely whether and how to digitize—so that the greatest possible added value can be achieved for everyone, regardless of foreign interference. And digital sovereignty is not just an abstract end in itself: It helps companies in the EU use the best possible IT products at an efficient business price. On the other hand, U.S. companies also benefit from EU digital sovereignty. In a free, sovereign market, it is also easier for startups and scale-ups abroad to build a business case in the EU. Unfortunately, we in the EU are still too far away from this ideal, at least at present. But why is this the case? It's a long story, because a lack of digital sovereignty didn't happen overnight or in just a few years. No, to answer this question, you have to go back almost 30 years in the history of European technology development. The best example of this for Germany is the mobile phone market. Immediately after the start of the cell phone boom in the 1990s, the country began to rely on outsourcing IT development. This ultimately resulted in the closure of Siemens Mobile, a formerly big-name mobile developer in the country. As a result, while companies were initially able to rely on suppliers from abroad, decades later, they became dependent on these same suppliers. And the consequences of this can be felt by everyone today: the European smartphone market has long since ceased to be dominated by European manufacturers, as was the case with cell phones just a few decades ago. This worked well for many years because the credo of the European digital economy and others was always that globalization is the way forward. In the last decade in particular, a lot has been digitized and networked with the expansion of mobile 5G connections, and more and more computing capacities have been outsourced to the global cloud without hesitation. However, the global turnaround that began with Covid-19 in 2020 and that has since continued with political unrest and tension have made this difficult. The insight is clear: While we trusted in digital globalization all those years ago, it is now a question of digital trust. Digitalization without trust is no longer sustainable in these times. Regionalization instead of globalization has therefore become the credo of our decade—and this also includes regaining the digital sovereignty we gave up. But that is, of course, easier said than done. We've had decades to lose our digital sovereignty, but we have been confronted with the global turnaround at such a rapid pace that it will be extremely difficult for us to establish digital sovereignty from now on. But this is where the circle must close. Digital sovereignty affects us all, and therefore, everyone can make a contribution. It's not just about us as the European Union investing more in the development of our own digital economy by supporting startups and scale-ups with targeted funding. It's even more important to get young people interested in training in STEM subjects. And ultimately, it's about how we as states, as individual companies and as individual consumers purchase IT. In this very concrete business context, in order to achieve digital sovereignty and technological resilience, it is first necessary to carry out a risk analysis. What technology do I use? In which areas do I most use it? To what extent are my processes dependent on it, and from which manufacturers does it come from? On the other hand, U.S. manufacturers, for example, should also ask themselves these questions, as the increasing regulatory requirements for cybersecurity as part of digital sovereignty also offer new business opportunities. Where EU-compliant products are offered, European companies can also integrate them more easily into their IT infrastructure. Because of this, ideally, digital sovereignty is a win-win situation for everyone. Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Financial Stocks Have Topped The Charts For The Past Year
A trader at work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Financial Stocks posted a 24% return ... More in the 12 months ended May 31, the best return of any market sector. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) The best performing sector in the stock market for the past year has been the unsung financial sector. Its 24% return for the year through May 31 was nearly double the return on the market as a whole. Unlike technology or biotech, financial stocks don't get people very excited. There's no tantalizing hint of instant riches from investing in banks, insurance companies, credit-card companies and the like. Where's the glamor? Yet many financial stocks, in their unobtrusive way, have been excellent investments over the years. In the past decade, Mastercard Inc. (MA) has returned 577%, Visa Inc. (V) 481%, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) 419%, American Express Co. (AXP) 341%, and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) 257%. For comparison, the Standard & Poor's 500 Total Return index has returned 243%, including dividends. Here are five financial stocks that I think are promising investments now. It's no coincidence that three U.S Secretaries of the Treasury – Robert Rubin, Henry Paulson and Steven Mnuchin – were Goldman Sachs alumni. Goldman in my opinion is the most prestigious investment banking firm in the country, though Morgan Stanley would dispute that. In the past ten years, Goldman has grown its revenue by an average of 9% a year, and its profits by an average of 14%. Analysts are divided on the stock, with 13 recommending it and 10 giving it a tepid 'hold.' I notice, however, that some analysts for whom I have considerable respect are in the 'buy' camp. That includes Kian Abouhossein of J.P. Morgan and Mike Mayo of Wells Fargo. I've done business with J.P. Morgan for about 17 years (it is the custodial broker for my hedge fund), so I may not be completely objective. But I find the value compelling here. The company posted a strong return on equity, 17%, in the past four quarters. Yet the stock is fairly cheap, at 13 times earnings. In addition to running a large brokerage and investment banking operation, the company owns Chase Bank, one of the largest commercial banks in the U.S. Jamie Dimon, the CEO since 2006, plans to retire within 'several' years, but in the meantime, I view him as a big plus. In the past 30 years, J.P. Morgan has been profitable every year, even in the Great Recession of 2008. The U.S. government has turned to it to take over troubled firms such as Bear Stearns in 2008 and First Republic Bank in 2023. Boasting a sparkling 34% return on equity in the past year, Progressive Corp. (PGR) is an auto and home insurer based in Mayfield Village, Ohio. You may know it from its quirky TV commercials, featuring wry humor and a woman named Flo. In auto-insurance market share, Progressive has been gaining on rival State Farm and has moved well ahead of Allstate. In home insurance, Progressive has also gained market share, but I worry that it has heavy exposure to hurricane-plagued Florida. The company stopped issuing new home insurance policies in Florida in 2022, and has said that it won't renew certain existing policies there. The stock is up 935% over the past decade. Based in Pasadena, California East West Bancorp. (EWBC) does some business in China and serves the Chinese-American population in many U.S. cities. Despite a terrible relationship between the U.S. and China, East West's stock has climbed 33% in the past year. If that relationship ever thaws out, I would expect East West to benefit. Meanwhile, East West has posted a respectable return on equity in the past year, above 15%. The stock seems modestly priced to me at about 11 times earnings. The bank's executive team, led by Dominic Ng as chief executive officer, is well aware of the touchy state of U.S.-China relations. The word 'China' does not appear once in the bank's 2024 annual report. Main Street Capital Corp. (MAIN), from Houston, Texas, invests in, and lends to, medium-sized and small private businesses. Its web site lists more than 100 companies with which it has done business. The firm has been profitable 19 years in a row, and has been publicly traded since 2007. Analysts disdain it (five 'hold' ratings and only one 'buy'), partly because they believe it may have to cut its dividend. It so, the cut will come from a rich starting point. The dividend yield right now is 7.2%. Disclosure: I own J.P. Morgan shares personally and for most of my clients. I own Goldman Sachs and Progressive for some clients. My wife, who is a portfolio manager at my firm, owns Progressive personally and for clients. John Dorfman is chairman of Dorfman Value Investments LLC in Boston, Massachusetts. He or his clients may own or trade securities discussed in this column. He can be reached at jdorfman@
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Compliance Playbook For US Companies In Response To Europe's CSRD
James Felton Keith is CEO at Inclusion Score Inc. and Labor Economist at Keith Institute. His latest book is #DataIsLabor. As Europe tightens the screws on corporate accountability through the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), many American business leaders may assume this legislation is a foreign affair. It's not. U.S. companies with European operations—whether through subsidiaries, branches or major supply chains—will be swept up in the CSRD's broad reporting requirements. And the clock is ticking. Having already started and phasing in through 2028, the CSRD will apply to over 50,000 companies, including thousands of U.S.-based firms. This includes if your company is publicly listed in the EU, has more than €150 million in EU revenues and at least one EU subsidiary or branch or is a large private company doing business in the EU. In other words, you can be subject to CSRD compliance, even if your headquarters is in New York, Houston or Silicon Valley. Compliance is not just about carbon disclosures. It demands a comprehensive environmental, social and governance (ESG) narrative—validated by third-party audits and reported in a digital format aligned with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). Social impact, particularly around human capital and workforce inclusion, is a major pillar. This is where I think many U.S. companies will stumble. American firms often lag behind their European counterparts in measuring and managing workforce equity in a systematic and certifiable manner. To communicate effectively across international borders, companies and governments are turning to the ISO-30415:2021 standard on diversity and inclusion, which provides a clear framework that supports the social reporting requirements of the CSRD. It breaks diversity and inclusion into four business functions: 1. Governance 2. Human resources 3. Product delivery 4. Supplier diversity These all mirror the key dimensions the CSRD asks companies to assess. Among the four, product and supplier diversity is typically the least developed, particularly across the S&P 500 and S&P Europe 350. Overall, though, I find that none of the four DEI categories are being effectively integrated into or conveyed through companies' operational risk management framework or personnel. This is not just a regulatory issue, but an insurance risk management cost. This is a global issue, and it is important to note that Lloyd's syndicates are using the ISO-30415 standard for DEI to segment underwriting of employment and professional insurance lines as grievances and lawsuits rise. According to a recent analysis by Bank of Montreal (BMO) and the Swiss Re Institute, the social inflation rate—the trend of rising insurance claims costs driven by increased litigation—is not expected to slow in 2025, posing a threat to insurer profitability and overall market stability. Under normal conditions, social inflation rates are about 3.7%. However, rates averaged about 7% between 2017 and 2023. For companies under CSRD scrutiny, this means focusing on audit-readiness for social impact statements, maturity models for continuous improvement and workforce data collection and analysis frameworks that can stand up to European regulators. My previous article explores the shift toward systematic DEI management through the adoption of ISO standards. To be clear, the ISO standard is the first and only global consensus on intentional equity and inclusion, designed as a risk management tool for complex organizations—particularly those operating across state and international borders. Companies should seek certification of both individuals and organizational silos in the standard to communicate their maturity to both insurers and regulators. In my experience, people often assume that there have been many "DEI" standards, but that is not the case. What we're seeing instead is the emergence of an industry focused on managing people alongside technology as central to the future of work. The ISO 30415 standard, in particular, is currently being adopted by a range of national and international regulators, including the French Association for Standardization (AFNOR) in France, the British Standards Institution (BSI) in the United Kingdom, the Standards Council of Canada (SCC) in Canada, the Colombian Institute of Technical Standards and Certification (IconTec) in Colombia and the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the United States. The ISO-30415 Diversity and Inclusion Service Management Forum currently offers certification in more than 100 countries and in four languages. The list of those who will be impacted within the United States is extensive and include: • Big tech (e.g., Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Google) with large European footprints • Pharmaceutical and healthcare companies (e.g., Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Abbott) with global clinical trials and EU sales • Financial services firms (e.g., JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citibank) with EU branches or listings • Multinational manufacturers and energy giants (e.g., General Electric, ExxonMobil, Ford, Caterpillar) • Retail and consumer goods companies (e.g., Procter & Gamble, Nike, Coca-Cola, McDonald's) selling to or sourcing from the EU If your company does over €150 million in revenue in Europe, has EU-based subsidiaries or trades in European markets, you're on the hook, and you will need a social accounting system to demonstrate compliance. Failing to comply with CSRD means more than reputational damage. It could lead to legal penalties, investor pressure and contractual barriers to market access in the EU. On the other hand, companies that take proactive steps to align with ISO-30415 stand to gain: • A competitive edge in global procurement and investment • A clear internal roadmap for DEI implementation • The ability to future-proof their workforce reporting in line with international standards As European regulators shift sustainability from voluntary to mandatory, American businesses must shift diversity and inclusion from a moral initiative to a measurable business function. I believe the ISO-30415 standard is the best tool to get there—and the CSRD is the reason you can't wait. Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
