HScreen · SPG

SPG · Simon Property Group, Inc. 13d old

conviction2

coverage tierT3-PRIMARY-COMPLETE

horizon12 months

Return distribution probability-weighted scenarios, never collapsed to a point

-11%22%

+8%53%

+24%25%

EV +7.82%

why these probabilities: ALL LEGS BUILT FORWARD FROM A DATED PER-SHARE FIGURE AND A MULTIPLE, and all three are defined against what the market expects. Per-share measure is FFO, NOT GAAP EPS: FY2025 GAAP EPS of 14.14 on USD 6.365bn revenue is inflated by property gains and is not earnings power for a REIT. FFO anchor: management's affirmed FY2024 guidance of 12.80-12.90 per share (SPG/SPG_2024Q3.json:7) compounded at the delivered mid-single- digit pace gives NTM FFO of ~USD 13.90, on which the 221.54 price is ~15.9x P/FFO. Dividend at 2.25/qtr rising toward 2.30 gives ~USD 9.05 of income, ~4.1% yield. BASE (53%) — the market's expectation, delivered. Consensus revenue growth of +3.7% for FY2027 and +3.3% for FY2028 (fmp:/stable/analyst-estimates?symbol=SPG&period=annual, as_of 2026-08-19), which nets against a ~5.5% ORGANIC domestic NOI pace once the ~120bp Taubman-stake contribution to the reported 6.7% is stripped out (SPG/SPG_2026Q1.json:47). Assumes ~4% FFO/share growth to ~USD 14.45 and NO multiple change, holding 15.9x → ~USD 230, i.e. +3.8% price, +8% total with the dividend. Note the FY2026 consensus line (+15.3% revenue, -3.3% EPS) is period-pooled and internally inconsistent with a 38-analyst price target that equals spot; I have therefore used the FY2027/FY2028 revenue lines and the guided FFO trajectory as the base anchor and recorded the pooling problem in evidence_gaps. BULL (25%) — gro

not built — options-implied distribution on the same axis, with the KL number and where the disagreement sits
needs: desk-options implied bands (v1.4 Part 4a) — activates at 60% coverage; currently 33%

Visibility how far ahead this name can be seen

not built — visibility score
needs: visibility_score.py

Trust how much weight this name's own record can carry (credibility Z)

not built — credibility
needs: credibility.py

Sizing survival-first size (half-Kelly) vs the enforced ladder

kelly not computable — no data

Payout durability does the distribution survive a downturn?

FAIL

DPS trajectorycut

interest cover now3.26x

interest cover at FORWARD rates2.33x

DPS trajectory = cut (cuts in [2020, 2021])

Falsifiers what would prove this wrong

The dividend is covered by cash flow with material surplus, so the payout is not the marginal funding source
Rent is compounding at a tenant-affordable burden — ABR growth persists with occupancy cost contained
Occupancy at 96% is a choice, not a ceiling — management states 97.0-97.5% is achievable
Refinancing is repricing upward but at a manageable ~60bp roll-up, and access is unconstrained
Tenant credit deterioration is absorbable — returned space is being re-let, as with the Saks outlet space
The USD 4bn development pipeline is value-accretive but does NOT create a step function in earnings growth (this falsifier tests the BULL leg, not the bear)
Simon Brand Ventures monetisation remains undated optionality and is correctly excluded from the base case

Conflicts surfaced, never netted out (T4)

My probability-weighted expected return is +7.8% total (0.22 x -11 + 0.53 x 8 + 0.25 x 24) against a street implied return of ~4.1% — the 38-analyst consensus target of 221.56 IS the spot price of 221.54, so the street i	medium
The revision tape is UNAVAILABLE for SPG, not merely flat. estimates_query.py drift returns n_up 0 / n_down 0 for both EPS and revenue over 365 days, median_move_pct null, velocity 0.0, and the outliers function returns	high
The consensus block is internally inconsistent and I did not smooth it. FY2026 shows +15.3% revenue growth alongside -3.3% EPS growth, FY2030 shows +8.5% revenue with -7.9% EPS, and the price target equals spot. Revenue	high
FY2025 reported EPS of 14.14 on revenue of USD 6.365bn with net income of USD 4.615bn implies a ~73% net margin, which is a property-gain artefact rather than operating earnings. Every consensus EPS figure in this pack i	medium
Ratings split 16 buy / 20 hold / 2 sell with a target range of 206-285 — a 38% spread top to bottom — against a consensus target at spot and a median (215) BELOW spot. The median being under the mean and under the price	medium
The prompt states SPG is an ALPHA-universe name and requires a catalyst with resolves_thesis true. SPG is NOT present in /Volumes/SSD/Hermes/system/universe_alpha.csv, verified directly, so the validator's ALPHA catalyst	high
Four of the schema's signal blocks have no desk behind them: options_view is null (no chain entry for SPG in desk_options.json, which is also why the options-implied anchor is null on both legs and was NOT synthesised fr	medium

The case against independent adversary, different model family (P6) weakened

Version history from the research record

archived versions1

archived	hash	bytes
2026-08-19T08:32:01	e0d66b8c2936	40,673

One version only — the archive was created today. The diff view fills in on the next re-run.

Rendered from canonical artifacts only (T1) — no terminal database exists. Every figure is read from the system's own files at render time; where an artifact is missing the panel names the dependency rather than showing an empty box. No execution path exists anywhere in this interface (T5), not even a link.