Hapvida’s actions (HAPV3) were highlighted by Ibovespa at Wednesday’s session (25), with a low of 5.52% (R $ 35.77), resuming the negative bias, after the advance the day before two followed falls.
In a report last Tuesday, Goldman Sachs analysts pointed out that the deceleration in May in supplementary health-related judicialization volumes do not necessarily translate into immediate relief from Hapvida provisions, as, according to Administration comments, the company still deals with a relevant volume of pending proceedings.
Goldman, in turn, said that while the latest data indicate still shy slowdown in supplementary health judicialization, this may signal a reduction in contingencies and judicial deposits in the sector – one of the main concerns of investors, including Hapvida, for which the house maintains purchase recommendation.
The National Council of Justice (CNJ) released yesterday (24) data showing that 24,142 new actions related to supplementary health were filed in May 2025. The number represents a slowdown in relation to the previous three months, which registered between 26 thousand and 27 thousand new cases per month, and is also below the volume of May 2024, when there were 27.2 thousand new cases.
The bank considers that this movement should not represent immediate relief in Hapvida provisions, since, according to the company’s administration itself, there is still a relevant volume of pending actions. Goldman indicates that it will be necessary to monitor the coming months to assess whether the observed slowdown consolidates as a structural tendency.
The report also points out that Hapvida has already shown a reduction in contingencies in 1T25, a reflection of improvements in claim management – as more agreements with beneficiaries, process standardization and more rigid control over contractual obligations.
Continues after advertising
The institution maintains a positive view of the paper, stating that current valuation levels – with adjusted price/profit from 10.1 times to 2025 and 8.8 times to 2026 – represent a good point of entry, with potential for repracification as the subject of judicialization is exceeded.
