Defence is booming. But a favorable market alone does not make a compelling investment case. For Nordic defence and dual-use companies, the challenge is to show investors how exceptional market demand translates into sustainable competitive advantage, profitable growth and ultimately shareholder value.

European defence is undergoing a structural shift. Defence spending is increasing, procurement priorities are changing and capital is flowing into defence, security and dual-use technologies. At the Hague summit on 25 June 2025, NATO allies committed to "invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035".

For Nordic companies, this creates significant opportunities which investors have noticed. But as more companies compete for capital and investor attention, exposure to an attractive market will not be enough.

A growing defence market is not an investment thesis. It is the starting point for one.

For management teams and boards, the more important question is: Why should our company be one of the winners – and how will that create value for shareholders?

From market opportunity to value creation

Companies naturally know their technologies, products and customers in great detail. They can explain why defence spending is increasing and why demand for their solutions is growing.

Investors look at the company through different lenses. They want to understand which part of the market the company can realistically address. Why it is positioned to win. Whether its competitive advantages can be sustained. How rapidly the business can scale. What capital will be required. And ultimately, how growth translates into margins, cash flow and returns on capital.

In other words, investors need to understand the company's value creation logic. This is where an investment narrative becomes important – not simply as a communications exercise, but as a strategic management tool.

What does an investor need to believe? 

Companies often approach investor communications by asking: What should we tell investors?

We believe management teams should start with a more demanding question:

What does an investor need to believe for our strategy to translate into an attractive investment case?

Five questions every management team should be able to answer

For defence and dual-use companies, five questions are particularly important.

1. Why this market – and which part of it?

“Defence” is not a market definition. Investors need to understand where the company's realistic addressable opportunity lies.

2. Why your company?

What gives your company the right to win? Technology, intellectual property, certifications, customer relationships, partnerships, installed base, speed or cost position? Genuine competitive advantages need to be distinguished from corporate claims.

3. Why now?

What has changed – in the market or within your company – that makes the opportunity actionable today?

4. How does growth become financial value?

Management needs to connect strategic ambition with revenue growth, margins, cash generation, investment requirements and capital allocation. Investors do not only want to know how large the company can become. They want to understand what kind of business it can become.

5. What should investors watch next?

What should happen over the next 12, 24 or 36 months if the strategy is working? A credible investment narrative gives investors tangible proof points against which execution can be assessed. Credibility is built when management gives the market a framework for measuring progress.

The difficult questions are often the most valuable

There is another reason to build the investment narrative carefully: the process exposes weaknesses. If management cannot explain why margins should improve as the business scales, the problem may not be the investor presentation.

If the addressable market is enormous but the company cannot define which part it can realistically capture, another market-growth slide will not solve the problem.

If investors struggle to understand the company's differentiation, management should ask whether the competitive advantage itself is sufficiently clear.

This is why investment narrative work belongs in discussions involving the CEO, CFO, management team and board. It sits at the intersection of strategy, capital markets and communication.

Done well, it does more than help a company explain its strategy. It tests the strategy through the eyes of the capital markets.

Ten minutes is a surprisingly good test

At the Listeds Investor Event · Defence, Nordic listed and pre-IPO defence and dual-use companies have around ten minutes each to present their businesses to investors and decision-makers.

Ten minutes is not much. That is precisely why it is useful. If the core investment case cannot be made understandable in ten minutes, another twenty slides rarely solve the problem.

The objective is not to simplify the business. It is to make its value creation logic clear.

The Nordic defence sector may be entering an exceptional period of growth. But as more companies compete for investor attention, the winners will not necessarily be those with the biggest market slides or the most ambitious growth targets.

They will be the companies that can credibly answer three questions:

Why us? Why now? And how does this create shareholder value?

That is the investment narrative.

|

|

Sponsored

From defence story to investment case: what investors need to understand

From defence story to investment case: what investors need to understand

Commercial partnership:

·

5 min read

Defence is booming. But a favorable market alone does not make a compelling investment case. For Nordic defence and dual-use companies, the challenge is to show investors how exceptional market demand translates into sustainable competitive advantage, profitable growth and ultimately shareholder value.

European defence is undergoing a structural shift. Defence spending is increasing, procurement priorities are changing and capital is flowing into defence, security and dual-use technologies. At the Hague summit on 25 June 2025, NATO allies committed to "invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035".

For Nordic companies, this creates significant opportunities which investors have noticed. But as more companies compete for capital and investor attention, exposure to an attractive market will not be enough.

A growing defence market is not an investment thesis. It is the starting point for one.

For management teams and boards, the more important question is: Why should our company be one of the winners – and how will that create value for shareholders?

From market opportunity to value creation

Companies naturally know their technologies, products and customers in great detail. They can explain why defence spending is increasing and why demand for their solutions is growing.

Investors look at the company through different lenses. They want to understand which part of the market the company can realistically address. Why it is positioned to win. Whether its competitive advantages can be sustained. How rapidly the business can scale. What capital will be required. And ultimately, how growth translates into margins, cash flow and returns on capital.

In other words, investors need to understand the company's value creation logic. This is where an investment narrative becomes important – not simply as a communications exercise, but as a strategic management tool.

What does an investor need to believe? 

Companies often approach investor communications by asking: What should we tell investors?

We believe management teams should start with a more demanding question:

What does an investor need to believe for our strategy to translate into an attractive investment case?

Five questions every management team should be able to answer

For defence and dual-use companies, five questions are particularly important.

1. Why this market – and which part of it?

“Defence” is not a market definition. Investors need to understand where the company's realistic addressable opportunity lies.

2. Why your company?

What gives your company the right to win? Technology, intellectual property, certifications, customer relationships, partnerships, installed base, speed or cost position? Genuine competitive advantages need to be distinguished from corporate claims.

3. Why now?

What has changed – in the market or within your company – that makes the opportunity actionable today?

4. How does growth become financial value?

Management needs to connect strategic ambition with revenue growth, margins, cash generation, investment requirements and capital allocation. Investors do not only want to know how large the company can become. They want to understand what kind of business it can become.

5. What should investors watch next?

What should happen over the next 12, 24 or 36 months if the strategy is working? A credible investment narrative gives investors tangible proof points against which execution can be assessed. Credibility is built when management gives the market a framework for measuring progress.

The difficult questions are often the most valuable

There is another reason to build the investment narrative carefully: the process exposes weaknesses. If management cannot explain why margins should improve as the business scales, the problem may not be the investor presentation.

If the addressable market is enormous but the company cannot define which part it can realistically capture, another market-growth slide will not solve the problem.

If investors struggle to understand the company's differentiation, management should ask whether the competitive advantage itself is sufficiently clear.

This is why investment narrative work belongs in discussions involving the CEO, CFO, management team and board. It sits at the intersection of strategy, capital markets and communication.

Done well, it does more than help a company explain its strategy. It tests the strategy through the eyes of the capital markets.

Ten minutes is a surprisingly good test

At the Listeds Investor Event · Defence, Nordic listed and pre-IPO defence and dual-use companies have around ten minutes each to present their businesses to investors and decision-makers.

Ten minutes is not much. That is precisely why it is useful. If the core investment case cannot be made understandable in ten minutes, another twenty slides rarely solve the problem.

The objective is not to simplify the business. It is to make its value creation logic clear.

The Nordic defence sector may be entering an exceptional period of growth. But as more companies compete for investor attention, the winners will not necessarily be those with the biggest market slides or the most ambitious growth targets.

They will be the companies that can credibly answer three questions:

Why us? Why now? And how does this create shareholder value?

That is the investment narrative.

About IR Partners

IR Partners is a strategic capital markets communications advisory. We work with listed companies, growth companies and companies preparing for the capital markets, helping management teams and boards clarify their investment narrative, strengthen their capital markets positioning and navigate strategic turning points.

Topics

# Topics

Authors

Tiina Olkkonen is the Founding Partner and Chair of IR Partners.

Tiina Olkkonen is the Founding Partner and Chair of IR Partners.

Authors

Guest columnist

Tiina Olkkonen is the Founding Partner and Chair of IR Partners.

All Listeds newsletters (bundle)

One sign-up, the full picture.

Get every Listeds newsletter: the daily signal drumbeat, the weekly Pulse briefing, the monthly Best of the Month, the CEO letter, and the Weekend read.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy

All Listeds newsletters (bundle)

One sign-up, the full picture.

Get every Listeds newsletter: the daily signal drumbeat, the weekly Pulse briefing, the monthly Best of the Month, the CEO letter, and the Weekend read.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Latest signalsLive feed
Moves trackerLive feed

Nordic Listed Leaders Board Programme

Learn board work from
the people who do it.

Harvard cases, coaching and open dialogue with people who sit on and work with boards of Finnish publicly listed companies.

Next cohort

19 November 2026

Then January, April, August and October 2027

Latest on Listeds

Executive Intelligence

Nineteen of 32 Helsinki large caps raised board fees this spring, and none cut

Board pay at Helsinki's large caps went one way this spring. Nineteen of the 32 boards raised their chair fee at the 2026 annual general meetings, 13 kept it unchanged, and none cut any fee.

Most raises were modest. Counting the boards that held, the typical chair fee rose 2.8%. Among the 19 boards that raised it, the typical increase was 5.2%. Eight raised it by less than 5%, seven by between 5% and 10%, and four by 10% or more.

Nineteen of 32 boards raised the chair fee; none cut it
Helsinki large caps by change in the annual chair fee, 2026 AGM against 2025
03691215Number of companies13Unchanged8Under 5%75% to under 10%410% or more
SSAB and Telia changes measured in kronor.
Source: Listeds board remuneration data, AGM resolution releases 2025 and 2026

Neste, Fortum and Sanoma made the biggest raises

Neste moved furthest. Its chair fee rose 18.2%, from €165,000 to €195,000, and its member fee 10.7% to €83,000. Fortum raised its chair fee 12.9%, from €155,000 to €175,000. Sanoma raised its chair fee 11.1% to €160,000, and its vice chair fee 19.0%, from €84,000 to €100,000, the biggest increase for any board role in the segment (Sanoma AGM release).

The fourth raise of 10% or more was Nordea's, which took its chair fee to €440,000, level with Nokia. Part 1 of this series looked at that move in detail.

The raises were spread across the table, not just among low payers

This was not a round of low-paying boards catching up. A year earlier, the boards that went on to raise their chair fee and the boards that held it had the same typical chair fee, €160,000.

At the very top, most boards held. Nokia, UPM, Stora Enso and KONE, four of the six highest payers, left every fee unchanged.

Board members got similar raises to their chairs

The rest of the board was not left behind. Nineteen boards also raised the fee for ordinary members. At the boards that raised fees, the typical increase was 5.2% for the chair, 5.3% for the vice chair and 4.4% for members, so the gap between the roles hardly changed.

In total, the chairs of the 32 large caps are now paid about €5.6 million a year, roughly €205,000 more than in 2025.

Executive Intelligence

Nordea catches Nokia at the top of Helsinki board pay

Nordea raised its chair fee by 10% this spring, to €440,000 a year. Its chair is now paid exactly as much as Nokia's, and both earn far more than the chair of any other Helsinki large cap.

A year ago Nordea paid its chair €400,000, the second-highest fee in the segment. This year's annual general meeting added €40,000. Nokia kept its chair fee unchanged at €440,000.

The gap to the rest is wide. The third-highest chair fee is Sampo's €250,000, followed by UPM at €240,000. The typical large cap chair earns €166,500, so Nordea and Nokia pay their chairs about 2.6 times as much.

Nordea now pays its chair as much as Nokia
Ten highest annual chair fees among Helsinki large caps, 2026 AGMs
Nokia€440,000Nordea€440,000Sampo€250,000UPM€240,000Stora Enso€221,728KONE€220,000Wärtsilä€212,000SSAB*€203,700Telia*€199,500Neste€195,000€0€100k€200k€300k€400k€500k€600k
*Set in SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate on the AGM date (SEK 10.8485 per euro for SSAB on 28 April 2026; SEK 10.8765 for Telia on 9 April 2026) and rounded to the nearest €100.
Source: Listeds board remuneration data, AGM resolution releases 2026

Nordea gave its chair a bigger raise than the rest of its board

The rest of the Nordea board received smaller raises. Ordinary members went up 3.1%, to €115,500, and the vice chair 5.6%, to €190,000. As a result, Nordea's chair now earns 3.8 times what an ordinary board member earns, up from 3.6 times a year ago. No other large cap has a wider gap between its chair and its members.

Nokia pays every board seat at the top of the market

Nokia spreads its money differently. An ordinary member of the Nokia board earns €185,000 a year, more than the chair is paid at 21 of the 32 large caps. Nokia's vice chair earns €210,000, the highest vice chair fee in the segment. Nordea pays most for the chair; Nokia pays the most, or joint most, for every seat.

The top fee has not risen, but two boards now pay it

For nomination boards preparing next year's proposals, the highest chair fee in Helsinki has not moved: Nokia already paid €440,000 in 2025. What has changed is that it is no longer a single outlier. Two of the largest boards in the market now pay the same top fee, and no other board comes close.

Join our Pulse, Best-of-the-Week, and Weekend newsletters

Join our Pulse, Best-of-the-Week, and Weekend newsletters