BKV CORPORATION (BKV): what the price assumes

boothcheck covers BKV CORPORATION (BKV) but does not put one priced-in number on it: here the defensible answer is the evidence rather than a point estimate. boothcheck publishes no house fair value, target price, or buy/sell rating. Narrative composed 2026-07-25.

Generated: 2026-07-29 · Exported: 2026-08-01 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/BKV

Headline

FieldValue
TickerBKV
CompanyBKV CORPORATION
Sector / IndustryEnergy
Current price$23.31/sh

What The Price Assumes (Inversion)

The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.

FieldValue
Inversion basiswhole-company
Operating margin (value-band context)14.1%
Operating margin today40.5%
Margin compression (value-band)-26.4pp
Multiple paid9x operating income

The operating-margin figure is value-band context at year 12: derived from the framework's value band, a separate calculation — not part of the priced-in solve.

The price sits below what even a 5%/yr operating-profit decline would warrant; the inversion reports a bound, not a solved growth path.

Solve inputs: computed at a 8.3% cost of capital with 4% terminal growth over a 5-year stage.

How unusual the bet is: within-range (limited comparison data)

ReferenceValue
cohort percentile (of 46 peers)13
implied end-window share0%

Valuation X-Ray

The price is supported by asset-based and earnings-power and relative-multiple and growth-DCF value. A value/asset-supported name, not a pure growth bet.

How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.

FamilyMedian price/FVModelsReads
Asset0.67x5justifies
Earnings0.43x2justifies
Relative1.00x5justifies
Growth0.44x2justifies

Families that justify the price: Asset, Earnings, Relative, Growth

The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 7.4%); the inversion above states its own rate.

Per-Model Detail (n=14)

ModelFamilyFVPrice/FVApplicableMethodology
DCF Perpetual GrowthGrowth$124.680.19xyesReference only (OCF-based, capex excluded): OCF $0.3B
DCF Exit MultipleGrowth$0.00noNegative/zero FCF or EBITDA — equity value floored at $0
Relative ValuationRelative$23.321.00xyesP/E 10x (static sector reference · 2026-04), scenarios: 7.5x / 10.0x / 12.0x (bear / base = reference held flat / bull), EV/EBITDA 6x
Simple DDMGrowthno
Two-Stage DDMGrowthno
Simple Excess ReturnAsset$29.240.80xyesBV/sh $20.23, ROE (TTM) 13.4%, ke 9.3%
Two-Stage Excess ReturnAsset$34.840.67xyes5yr excess ROE then converge to ke=9.3%
Discounted Future Market CapGrowth$33.820.69xyesRev $1.0B, growth 30% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 1.8x / 2.5x / 2.9x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 6x)
Peter Lynch Fair ValueRelative$39.960.58xyesEPS $3.33, growth 2% (input: historical EPS growth), PEG=4.31 (Overvalued)
Margin TrajectoryGrowthno
Earnings Power ValueEarnings$0.012331.00xyesNormalized EBIT (3y avg op income, one-time charges added back) $0.05B × (1−18%) / WACC 7.4% → EPV (no growth) (excluded from median)
Residual IncomeAsset$36.050.65xyesBV $20.23 + 5yr PV of (ROE (TTM) 13.4% − Kₑ 9.3%) × BV; BV grows 8.7%/yr
Graham NumberAsset$38.930.60xyes√(22.5 × EPS $3.33 × BVPS $20.23) — Graham's conservative floor
EV/EBITDA RelativeRelative$14.131.65xyesEBITDA $0.45B × sector EV/EBITDA 6.0x
FCF YieldEarningsno
SBC-Adj FCF YieldEarningsno
Ben Graham FormulaEarnings$107.450.22xyesEPS $3.33 × (8.5 + 2×15.0%) × (4.4 / 5.3%)
ROIC-Justified P/BAsset$5.724.08xyesBV $20.23 × (ROIC 2.1% / WACC 7.4%)
P/Sales SectorRelative$11.402.04xyesRevenue $1.04B × sector P/S 1.2x
PEG Fair ValueRelative$124.880.19xyesEPS $3.33 × (PEG 1.5 × growth 25.0% (input: historical EPS growth)) → PE 37.5x
Earnings YieldEarnings$36.000.65xyesEPS $3.33 / required return 9.3% (Rf 4.3% + ERP 5.0%)
Funds From Operations MultipleRelativeno
Clinical Phase NPVGrowthno
MertonAssetno
V5 Mechanicalno

Solvency

FieldValue
Net debt$1.2b
Net debt / NOPAT (after-tax)3.49x
Net debt / operating income (pre-tax)2.86x
Share count CAGR (dilution)22.0%
Burning cashno

Interest expense is not separately reported in the latest filings, so interest coverage cannot be computed.

Bullet Takeaways

Bull Case

The reported financials describe a natural gas producer, and the accounting behind them is not wrong. It is simply an incomplete picture of what the company owns. Under the segment rules the filer reports itself as one operating segment and one reportable segment, so a single operating line carries everything the market usually values. Half of a power business does not appear in it. At the end of 2025 the company held a 50% interest in BKV-BPP Power, which owns and operates the Temple Plants, which are two combined cycle gas turbine and steam turbine power plants located on the same site in the ERCOT North Zone in Temple, Texas. Its share of the result lands below the operating line as earnings from equity affiliate: $14.9 million in 2025, $10.4 million in 2024, and $16.9 million in 2023.

The scale of what sits down there is the point. For 2026 management guides the power business alone to 135 to 175 million dollars of adjusted EBITDAX, using its own definition of that measure. Set that beside a trailing operating profit of $196.6 million for the entire company and the mismatch is obvious. Nothing else in the peer group carries an ERCOT generation stake. CRK, AR and RRC are all asked to sell molecules and be judged on how cheaply they lift them. This one sells electricity as well, while producing the fuel that kind of plant burns.

The carbon business is the second thing the operating line does not capture. The 10-K describes the process without romance: capturing carbon dioxide before it is released into the atmosphere and then compressing the captured CO 2 and transporting it via pipeline to sites where it can be injected into Underground Injection Control wells, with the output framed as Carbon Sequestered Gas, a molecule sold with its emissions already accounted for. In the first quarter of 2026 that business took $20.0 million of a $118.6 million capital budget, against $16.7 million for power and $81.9 million for drilling. Two facilities began operating at the end of June 2026, one under a joint venture with Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners at roughly 90,000 metric tons a year and one co-developed with Banpu Power US at roughly 32,000.

Meanwhile the core got bigger in the ordinary way. In September 2025 the company acquired BKV Barnett II, increasing reserves by 743.0 Bcfe, which added 1,002.0 gross (877.6 net) locations in the Barnett to the development schedule. Production ran 925.0 MMcfe/d in the first quarter of 2026 with full-year guidance of 915 to 955, and total operating cash costs of 1.54 dollars per Mcfe against a realized gas price of 3.53 dollars per Mcf before hedges. A mature basin that most operators walked away from a decade ago turns out to work fine when somebody buys it cheaply and runs it as a manufacturing operation.

Bear Case

Gas producers do not really have earnings. They have a price that passes through a cost structure, and the cost structure barely moves. Look at three consecutive years on essentially the same acreage: income attributable to the company of $116.9 million in 2023, a loss of $142.9 million in 2024, and $173.1 million in 2025. Nothing structural changed between those figures. The commodity did. Trailing operating profit of $196.6 million is a point on that curve, not a level, and the distinction matters because the price is being paid against the point.

What the price asks for, read backwards, is operating-profit growth of about 10.7% a year sustained across a five-year stage. On a cyclical asset base that sentence lands differently than it would for a subscription business. The growth has to arrive from volume, from price, or from the pieces that are not gas at all, and exactly one of those three sits inside management's control. Full-year production guidance of 915 to 955 MMcfe/d against 925.0 in the first quarter is roughly flat, so volume is not the lever this year.

Where the cycle sits is visible in the cohort's own prints. CRK grew revenue 60.3% over the trailing year on a 30.3% operating margin. GPOR grew 90.7% on 49.1%. AR grew 25.6% on 23.1%. Growth rates like that across an entire peer group are not what an early cycle looks like, and this company's own operating margin of 18.6% on about 1.04 billion dollars of revenue is the thinnest of that set. The power business carries its own version of the same exposure: the 10-K warns that if a counterparty is not able to satisfy its obligations under the HRCO, it must purchase power at prevailing market prices to satisfy the HRCO, and that increases in power pricing could limit the benefit we receive under HRCOs and may result in losses.

Leverage decides how long any of this can be wrong. Net debt of about 1.15 billion dollars sits against liquid assets of 289 million dollars, and net debt runs about 5.87 times operating profit. That ratio is measured after depreciation and depletion, which for a producer is the largest single charge on the income statement, so the company's own leverage measure, taken against cash flow before those charges, reads far lower at 2.02x at the end of the first quarter. Both figures are honest. The distance between them is precisely the capital consumed replacing the reserves that were produced, which is the part of a producer's economics that never shows up in a leverage covenant.

Then there is the count of shares those results are divided by. It has grown at roughly 22% a year since late 2023. Reserves and production have to outrun that before a holder sees any of it. What bounds the downside is not the gas at all: the company holds roughly 130 million dollars of equity interests outside the producing business, worth about 5% of market value. The 10-K identifies that holding as the half-share of BKV-BPP Power. It is a floor beneath the bear case rather than a lift to the bull one, and at that size it is a thin one.

Valuation

Nineteen years of today's operating profit is roughly what the enterprise costs. Read the other way, that embeds operating-profit growth of about 10.7% a year across a five-year stage, computed at an 8.5% cost of capital. The sensitivity around it is severe: a single percentage point on the cost of capital moves the required pace by about 7 points. For a producer whose realized price moves with weather, storage and the export schedule, that is a very wide band drawn around one figure, and it should be read as a direction rather than a measurement.

The families of method split in an unusual way here. The price sits about 3% above where peer multiples center, which is to say almost exactly on them. Every other family lands above the price: the asset-value methods that work off book value and reserves, the earnings-power methods that capitalize profit as it stands, and the forward cash-flow methods. That is the signature of a value-supported name rather than a growth bet. It also sits oddly beside the fact that measured against operating profit, this company prices in the upper half of its peer group.

Both readings are correct, and the reason they disagree is worth a minute. The asset methods start from book value of $21.63 a share, which on a company that has just absorbed a large reserve acquisition reflects recent purchase prices rather than old cost. The multiple comparison starts from operating profit, which is depressed by the depletion charge running against those same newly bought reserves. Buy the assets, book them, then charge them against earnings: the balance sheet looks full and the income statement looks thin, at the same moment and for the same reason.

Two filed inputs carry that story. The September 2025 acquisition of BKV Barnett II came with increasing reserves by 743.0 Bcfe and brought 1,002.0 gross (877.6 net) locations in the Barnett into the development schedule. And because the company reports itself as one operating segment and one reportable segment, the half-share of the Temple power plants reaches the income statement only as earnings from equity affiliate, $14.9 million of it in 2025, with none of the revenue and none of the operating profit behind it appearing anywhere above.

The cohort comparison closes the picture rather than opening it. CRK earns a 30.3% operating margin and MGY 32.7%, against this company's 18.6%, so on unit economics alone this is not the cheap one. Debt bounds the patience available: about 1.15 billion dollars of it net, roughly 5.87 times operating profit, with 289 million dollars of liquid assets behind that. Which makes the real question narrower than a view on gas. The price is a bet that the two businesses sitting outside the operating line grow into a multiple the gas business alone would not carry.

Catalysts

Second-quarter results are due before the market opens on August 6, 2026, with a call at 10:00 a.m. Eastern. The first quarter set the baseline: income attributable to the company of $44.1 million, or $0.42 a diluted share, production of 925.0 MMcfe/d, a realized natural gas price of 3.53 dollars per Mcf before hedges and 3.14 dollars including them, and total operating cash costs of 1.54 dollars per Mcfe. The Temple plants generated 1,981 GWh over the same three months.

Guidance for the full year runs to production of 915 to 955 MMcfe/d and capital spending of 570 to 740 million dollars, with the power business alone guided to adjusted EBITDAX of 135 to 175 million dollars on the company's own definition of that measure. The wide capital range is the number to watch: the top of it is more than a quarter above the bottom, and the difference is mostly discretionary spending on power and carbon projects rather than on maintaining production.

The carbon side moved in the quarter just ended. Two sequestration facilities began operating at the end of June 2026, one at Eagle Ford under the joint venture with Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners at roughly 90,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, and Cotton Cove, co-developed with Banpu Power US, at roughly 32,000 metric tons annually over its operating life. Both are small against the stated target of a 1.5 million metric ton annual injection rate by 2028, which is the frame for judging whether the next several announcements are progress or press releases.

Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)

BKV Corporation (consolidated natural gas E&P) (reported)

Methodology Note

Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.

Sources

company announcement, June 30, 2026 · Q1 2026 earnings release, May 7, 2026 · company announcement, July 2026

View the full interactive BKV report on boothcheck