Inter is already a profitable Brazilian digital bank with meaningful deposit funding, customers and payment activity. Its low-cost distribution and integrated account, cards, credit, investments and insurance can drive revenue per active customer and incremental earnings without proportionate servicing expenses. However, a broad super-app is not a proprietary network, and the bank lacks evidence of an unassailable underwriting or switching-cost moat. It does not need to overtake Nubank or Itaú to compound per-share value: it must grow deposits and loans while producing returns above the true cost of equity.

The investment debate is whether stronger underlying returns on equity (currently 16.3% for Q2) can emerge as customers mature, or whether rapidly growing private-payroll and credit-card exposures consume the apparent operating leverage through future loss recognition. A significant recent equity selloff also coincides with the October 19–November 17 BDR sales facility; a temporary supply imbalance is plausible but cannot be quantified from the filings.

What the Market May Be Mispricing

Debate	Research judgment
Credit-seasoned ROE	Improving customer economics are real but 18–20%+ sustainable ROE is not yet demonstrated
Below-book share price	At ~0.85× book, the bank could be fairly priced if persistent ROE falls short of required equity returns; book value is not a liquidation floor
BDR conversion selling	Official sales facility is confirmed, but neither the exact stock-price impact nor eventual total sales is known
Competitive advantage	66%-of-CDI funding cost and low-cost payments distribution offer a moderate advantage; Nubank has much higher scale and efficiency
Risk and dilution	Private-payroll loss seasoning, capital requirements, BRL depreciation, family voting control and acquisition cash needs could reduce USD per-share returns

Inter provides digital banking, lending, investments, insurance distribution and related services, primarily in Brazil. Deposits fund a growing credit portfolio, while cards, payments and distribution fees broaden monetization. The platform seeks to become customers' primary financial relationship. Reported gross revenue, net interest income and net revenue have different definitions; deposits and funding liabilities are operating inputs rather than ordinary industrial-company debt.

Business Takeaway

Inter provides digital banking, lending, investments, insurance distribution and related services, primarily in Brazil. Primary-customer engagement, risk-adjusted NIM, ARPAC, cost to serve, nonperforming loans and return on equity are the key metrics.

Brazil offers a large banking profit pool and substantial digital adoption. Incumbent banks, Nubank and other fintechs compete intensely. Inter's transactional customer reach exceeds its lending penetration, but capturing more credit exposure also means accepting more credit and funding risk. FX matters directly to U.S.-listed shareholders.

Market-Share Analysis

Comparable same-definition share data for the subject and its principal rivals were not established. TAM estimates and company-specific volume measures are not treated as directly comparable market shares. The positioning analysis below is more reliable than a table of unmatched percentages.

Competitive Scale / Position

Company / Platform	Primary Position	Relative Scale	Growth Direction	Investment Relevance
Nu (NU)	Direct in Brazil: digital deposits, cards and consumer credit	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Competes for primary banking relationships	Customer choice in the stated segment only
Itaú Unibanco (ITUB)	Direct in Brazil: deposits, lending and financial services	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Competes for Brazilian financial relationships	Customer choice in the stated segment only
Banco do Brasil; Bradesco; Santander Brasil	Direct in Brazil: retail banking and credit	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Incumbent alternatives in the same geography	Customer choice in the stated segment only

Industry Takeaway

FX matters directly to U.S.-listed shareholders. The base case requires evidence of profitable adoption within that market.

Competitive Landscape

Brazilian deposits and lending determine the operating peer set. SoFi is excluded from direct competition because its U.S. franchise does not serve the same core market.

Competitor	Market Share	Positioning	Advantages vs. Company	Disadvantages vs. Company	Current Direction
Nu (NU)	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: digital deposits, cards and consumer credit	Large digital banking customer network	Country mix and credit seasoning differ	Competes for primary banking relationships
Itaú Unibanco (ITUB)	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: deposits, lending and financial services	Established funding, product breadth and distribution	Branch-based cost structure differs from digital Inter	Competes for Brazilian financial relationships
Banco do Brasil; Bradesco; Santander Brasil	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: retail banking and credit	Existing deposit and borrower relationships	Different channel costs and portfolio mixes	Incumbent alternatives in the same geography

Moat Assessment

Overall moat: Moderate at best; direction: developing, not yet proven through a full credit cycle. Inter's strongest defensible asset is low-cost deposit funding: funding expense near 66% of CDI at Q2 2026 suggests a useful spread advantage, provided deposits remain sticky as competitors adjust rates. Digital distribution and approximately 9% company-reported Pix transaction share signal meaningful engagement, but Pix is shared payment infrastructure, not an exclusive Inter network effect. The app combines banking, payments, credit, investing and insurance; cross-sell may create modest customer friction, but product features can be copied.

Potential moat	Assessment	Test
Deposit funding cost	Moderate	Persistently low cost of funds without unstable rate-sensitive deposits
Digital distribution	Moderate	Greater primary-bank engagement at stable acquisition and servicing cost
Switching costs	Low–moderate	More recurring multi-product relationships and durable balances
Brand	Moderate	Retained transaction share despite Nubank and incumbent responses
Underwriting and data	Unproven	Risk-adjusted NIM and through-cycle loss rates across seasoned cohorts
Network effects	Weak	Pix is a common Brazilian rail rather than Inter-owned infrastructure
Product differentiation	Low–moderate	Better customer economics, not just a wider menu of products

Nubank's Q2 2026 consolidated ROE (~33%) and efficiency ratio (~19.5%) exceed Inter's 16.3% and 42.1%. Customer and geographic definitions are not directly interchangeable. This gap is a reason not to assume Inter deserves Nubank's valuation multiple. Itaú's broader funding and credit franchise adds a separate incumbent hurdle.

Competitive Takeaway

A useful integrated platform and low service costs support a moderate advantage. The direct rivals determine commercial pressure; diversified or sector anchors provide valuation context and are not substitutes for direct competition.

Historical Financials

Standardized period history (reviewed 2026-11-07): Completed issuer fiscal years only, plus actually disclosed standalone quarters and cumulative YTD for the latest open FY. Currency BRL, flows in millions, with fiscal dates defined by the issuer. Values marked derived come from disclosed period differences/sums, not TTM. Missing = N/D (not zero). The issuer reports net banking revenue and net income but industrial FCF is not an appropriate distributable-cash metric. The release reports Q2 net income R$421M. Issuer net revenue was R$2,441M in Q1 and approximately R$2,637M in Q2 (H1 approximately R$5,078M), but the historical standardized revenue is a different bank-income definition; these net revenues are excluded from the comparable history table. Standalone revenue and SBC remain N/D pending same-definition reconciliation; no fabricated FCF.

Period	Revenue	Growth	Gross Margin	Operating Margin	FCF	FCF Margin	SBC	Diluted Shares	Cash	Debt
FY2024	4,601	43.28%	N/A	N/A	-6,475	N/A	N/D	439	983.2	11,929
FY2025	5,985	30.08%	N/A	N/A	-4,460	N/A	N/D	444	3,138	18,141
Q1 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D
Q2 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D
H1 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D

Financial Takeaways

Q2 2026 reported net revenue was ~R$2.64B (+31.7% year over year), net income ~R$421M (+34%), ROE 16.3%, 45.3M total customers and 26.4M active customers. Funding reached ~R$77.2B, with bank-level Basel capital near 14.4%, and risk-adjusted NIM was 5.86%. Net ARPAC of R$35.5 less cost to serve of R$13.2 gives ~R$22.2 of monthly customer contribution before all credit losses and corporate expenses.

The major offset is deteriorating credit quality: 90-day-plus NPLs were about 5.1% versus 4.4% a year earlier; cost of risk ~5.9% versus ~5.0%. Private payroll grew from ~R$0.7B to ~R$2.8B in twelve months. Earlier credit-card write-offs mechanically lowered reported NPLs by ~30 basis points without reducing the underlying economic loss. Do not extrapolate interest yields into permanent profitability before the loan books season.

Industrial FCF and EV/revenue are poor banking valuation measures because loan growth and funding dominate cash flow. The model therefore uses sustainable USD EPS after credit losses and required reinvestment, with Brazil and FX risk reflected in discount-rate and scenario choices.

Bank revenue, cash, debt and operating cash flow follow banking accounting. Industrial EV and CFO-minus-capex multiples are not used. The net revenue series is after financial costs; evaluate credit provisions, capital, funding and sustainable earnings together.

Financial direction: Improving — assess the reported trend alongside dilution and the balance sheet.

Current Valuation

Market-data snapshot: 2026-11-04 regular-session close, USD. The total share count, rather than only the publicly floated Class A share count, is used for economic market capitalization. Bank funding and loan-book liabilities make conventional enterprise valuation inappropriate for the investment thesis.

Metric	Value
Price Snapshot	$3.95 — 2026-11-04 regular-session close, America/New_York
Economic shares outstanding	441.51M (Class A + other economic classes; provider estimate)
Market Capitalization	~$1.74B ($3.95 × 441.51M)
Enterprise Value	N/A — not used for bank equity valuation
Trailing P/E	5.98×
Provider forward P/E	4.86×
P/B	0.85×
Price / tangible book	~1.00×
Latest quarterly ROE	16.3% (Q2 2026)

Comparable Company Analysis

Consistent provider and November 4 closing snapshot; consolidated bank ratios are not matched segment profitability. Peer forward earnings use provider estimates, not our independent Inter model.

Company	Relevance	Public / Private	Trailing P/E	Forward P/E	P/B	Growth / Margin / Risk Context
INTR — Inter & Co	Subject: Brazilian accounts, loans, payments	Public	5.98×	4.86×	0.85×	Emerging digital bank; improving ARPAC but payroll credit seasoning
NU — Nubank	Direct competitor in Brazilian deposits, cards and consumer lending; larger Latin American footprint	Public	16.33×	12.27×	4.23×	Much higher reported ROE and efficiency; different geography and scale
ITUB — Itaú Unibanco	Direct incumbent in Brazilian retail deposits and lending; diversified established bank	Public	9.30×	7.67×	1.76×	Stronger scale, mature distribution and underwriting; different funding mix
BBD — Bradesco	Direct incumbent in Brazilian retail accounts, loans and insurance	Public	5.71×	4.64×	0.66×	Lower-priced incumbent proves that below-book alone is not a bargain
Banco do Brasil; Santander Brasil	Direct incumbent Brazilian retail credit and deposit alternatives	Public subsidiaries / bank groups	N/D — no matched set	N/D — no matched set	N/D — no matched set	Operating competitors; no unmatched consolidated multiple imputed

Comparable takeaway: Inter is substantially cheaper than Nubank and Itaú but not than Bradesco. A sustained ROE advantage is required for a deserved premium; a low P/B without returns above the cost of equity is not a margin of safety. As an illustrative Gordon-growth cross-check, P/B = (ROE - g)/(Ke - g); with Ke 18% and long-run g 4%, 16% steady-state ROE implies ~0.86× book, whereas 20% implies ~1.14×. This differs from the separate 15% discount rate in the 2029 scenario valuation and is a sensitivity illustration, not a second independent fair value.

Valuation Scenarios

Present equity value is normalized 2029 USD EPS × terminal P/E divided by 1.15^3; no interim dividends included. Revenue-path assumptions and 454.9M forecast economic shares remain from the prior model as transparent scenario scaffolding; EPS and terminal multiples were independently reduced after reassessing credit risk and peer valuations. No 2029 scenario is management guidance or consensus.

Scenario	Key Assumptions	Fair Value	Probability	Probability Rationale	Return From Price Snapshot
Bear	3Y revenue CAGR 10%; sustainable 2029 EPS $0.55; 7× P/E; 15% discount; persistent credit losses and weaker BRL	$2.53	30%	Private-payroll seasoning and weaker capital/FX outcomes remain credible	-35.9%
Base	3Y revenue CAGR 22%; sustainable 2029 EPS $1.05; 10× P/E; 15% discount; better monetization and progressing ROE	$6.90	50%	Improving profitability with controlled provisioning, but still requires proof	+74.7%
Bull	3Y revenue CAGR 30%; sustainable 2029 EPS $1.45; 13× P/E; 15% discount; stronger primary-bank adoption and sustainable ROE >20%	$12.39	20%	Durable higher ROE and re-rating are possible but not established	+213.7%
Probability-Weighted	30% × $2.53 + 50% × $6.90 + 20% × $12.39	$6.69	100%	Judgmental scenario mix, no assumed dividend	+69.4%

Valuation Takeaway

• Primary valuation method: Present value of sustainable late-2029 USD equity earnings × scenario P/E; the three-year convention matches the existing workpaper, with no double deduction for bank funding liabilities.
• Independent re-underwriting: The prior bear/base/bull EPS ($0.65/$1.15/$1.70) and terminal P/Es (8×/12×/16×) were reduced to $0.55/$1.05/$1.45 and 7×/10×/13× respectively. Risks are credit seasoning, underproven moat, BRL translation and uncertain post-BDR liquidity. Scenario probabilities (30/50/20), discount rate (15%) and revenue/shares framework remain after review because the latest completed earnings quarter has not changed and those are useful controlled sensitivities.
• Cross-check methods: Below-book price requires examining sustainable ROE rather than treating tangible assets as immediately distributable; peer multiples vary widely, including Bradesco below book. The earnings and dilution bridge is recorded in the linked workpaper.
• Key valuation dependencies: Loan-loss seasoning, risk-adjusted NIM, low-cost deposit persistence, primary-customer monetization, capital requirements and FX.
• Valuation confidence / Risk Level: 42/100 / High. Cash-flow and credit outcomes remain wide and a substantial discount is warranted.
• Margin-of-safety conclusion: Strong Buy = min($6.69/1.50, $2.53×1.10) = $2.78; Buy upper = $6.69/1.25 = $5.35; Avoid above = $6.69/0.90 = $7.43. At $3.95, status is speculative Buy, not Strong Buy. The indicated 69.4% expected return is to present scenario fair values, not an annualized performance promise.

Management has improved monetization and efficiency, but confidence in payroll lending must be tested against actual loss emergence rather than projected loan yields. On October 13, Inter announced that Francisco Santos was expected to take the Chief Growth Officer role and Alexandre Riccio's group-level operations responsibilities would include credit and collections; the potential control benefit is not yet measurable. On October 19, an agreement was reported for Banco Inter to acquire Wiz's remaining 39.75% interest in Inter Seguros for approximately R$409.5M, subject to adjustments and approvals. Greater ownership could enhance insurance economics but consumes capital.

Inter's dual-class / controlling-shareholder voting structure limits public shareholders' influence. Continue to monitor effective underwriting controls, risk appetite, capital ratios, funding resilience, acquisition returns and dilution.

Management Takeaway

The organizational changes may improve execution, but neither appointment nor insurance acquisition establishes superior underwriting performance. Sustained, risk-adjusted ROE and capital discipline matter more than headline loan origination growth.

Analyzed call: Q2 2026, complete material Q&A · Research snapshot: 2026-11-04

The following are original paraphrases of the complete Q2 2026 earnings-call's four material analyst question groups and management responses, not verbatim transcript excerpts. No newer quarterly earnings call was available as of this review.

Analyst / Firm	Core Question	Management Response	Research Read-Through
Eduardo Rosman / BTG Pactual	Was Q2's improvement in NIM partly due to temporary inflation or indexation timing rather than recurring spread gains? What could happen to NIM and loan-loss provisions as early-stage arrears increase?	Management identified an inflation-linked accounting timing effect and suggested adjusting reported Q1 and Q2 NIM by roughly 15 bps in opposite directions to compare underlying trends. It maintained an expectation for about 40 bps of annual improvement and cost of risk around 6%, subject to loan mix.	Normalize funding and indexation timing and do not extrapolate a single-quarter margin before provisions.
Mario Pierry / Bank of America	Can Inter continue near-30% credit growth despite household indebtedness, high rates and the macro cycle, and has government-backed renegotiation substantially improved collection outcomes?	Management pointed to small current lending penetration relative to its customer base and Brazilian market, arguing it can select better borrowers. Its discussion of renegotiation indicated approximately R$100M of program volume and a modest incremental pretax effect, not a broad credit cure.	Long-run loan growth only adds value if mature cohorts earn adequate returns after credit losses.
Labarta / Goldman Sachs	How should securities, FX and derivatives income be reconciled with sustainable NIM, and why has the coverage ratio fallen while credit risks are still elevated?	Management described offsetting hedges and reclassifications between securities/derivatives and underlying portfolios. It attributed part of coverage movement toward the mid-130% area to seasonality and payroll-loan loss emergence and indicated an approximate 130–135% band depending on portfolio evolution.	Evaluate consolidated NIM and the coverage/credit-loss trend together, not isolated financial statement lines.
Neha Agarwala / HSBC	Why was the credit-card write-off period shortened and how does this affect reported NPLs? Which collection and repricing changes could repair private-payroll credit quality?	Management explained that moving the write-off date from 360 to 330 days mechanically reduced reported consolidated NPLs by about 30 bps, without a corresponding reduction in provisions. It discussed borrower-employer relinking, renegotiation, insurance and tighter origination standards; rate caps restricted some loans.	Apparent NPL improvement may reflect accounting timing rather than real improvement in borrower performance.

Analyst-Q&A Takeaway

Q2 inflation-linked NIM timing and earlier write-offs both complicate the headline improvements. For Q3, prioritize vintage-level private-payroll collections, risk-adjusted margins, loan-loss coverage and the impact of tighter origination, rather than management confidence alone.

Source	Type	Date / Period	What It Supports
www.sec.gov	Company IR / earnings filing	Q2 2026	Latest operating results, guidance, products and financial supplement
INTR complete earnings-call transcript	Transcript	Q2 2026	Prepared remarks and all material Q&A exchanges
INTR regular-session historical price	Market data	2026-10-20 original snapshot	Historical initial ranking price; superseded by November 4 market snapshot
INTR valuation statistics	Market data	2026-10-20 original snapshot	Historical initial comparable ratios; November 4 source row supersedes these values
INTR historical income statement	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical income statement; source-native currency and definitions
INTR historical balance sheet	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical balance sheet; source-native currency and definitions
INTR historical cash flows	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical cash flows; source-native currency and definitions
Nu Holdings Ltd. statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis
Itaú Unibanco statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis
SoFi Technologies, Inc. statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis

| Inter&Co BDR program notice | Company investor relations | September–November 2026 | BDR options and October 19–November 17 sales-facility period | | BDR sales-facility SEC notice | Regulatory filing | 2026-10-19 | Sales facility mechanism; liquidation timing and unresolved share quantity | | Inter leadership SEC announcement | Regulatory filing | 2026-10-13 | Growth and operations leadership responsibilities | | Wiz / Inter Seguros transaction report | Transaction report | 2026-10-19 | 39.75% minority insurance stake purchase; price and conditions | | NU Q2 2026 earnings release | Peer company results | Q2 2026 | Scale, activity, ROE and efficiency comparison (different geographic bases) | | INTR November 4 statistics | Market data | 2026-11-04 close | Price, 441.51M economic shares, market capitalization, earnings and book multiples | | NU November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted peer valuation metrics; consolidated Latin American mix | | ITUB November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted Brazilian bank valuation metrics | | BBD November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted Brazilian incumbent valuation metrics |

Research context

• Company: Inter & Co, Inc.

• Ticker: INTR

• Exchange: Nasdaq

• Sector / Industry: Financials / Brazilian digital banking

• Template version: 2.7

• Research date: 2026-11-04

• Valuation / score price snapshot: $3.95 — 2026-11-04 regular-session close, America/New_York

• Valuation refresh date: 2026-11-04

• Tracking tier: Primary Watchlist

• Owned: No

• Primary operating period reviewed: Q2 2026

• Historical period reviewed: completed FY2024-FY2025; Q1 FY2026, Q2 FY2026, H1 FY2026

• Latest investor presentation reviewed: Results release and associated financial tables; no separate slide deck materially used

• Latest earnings call reviewed: Q2 2026, complete material Q&A

• Latest post-earnings management commentary reviewed: October 13 leadership reorganization; October 19 BDR sales facility and Inter Seguros agreement

• Price snapshot date: 2026-11-04

• Price snapshot time / timezone: Regular-session close, America/New_York (including exchange half-days)

• Competitor / analyst-Q&A audit: 2026-10-28 historical scope correction; 2026-11-04 operating context, valuation and Q&A read-through refreshed.

INTR — Inter & Co, Inc.

Company & Research Metadata

• Company: Inter & Co, Inc.

• Ticker: INTR

• Exchange: Nasdaq

• Sector / Industry: Financials / Brazilian digital banking

• Template version: 2.7

• Research date: 2026-11-04

• Valuation / score price snapshot: $3.95 — 2026-11-04 regular-session close, America/New_York

• Valuation refresh date: 2026-11-04

• Tracking tier: Primary Watchlist

• Owned: No

• Primary operating period reviewed: Q2 2026

• Historical period reviewed: completed FY2024-FY2025; Q1 FY2026, Q2 FY2026, H1 FY2026

• Latest investor presentation reviewed: Results release and associated financial tables; no separate slide deck materially used

• Latest earnings call reviewed: Q2 2026, complete material Q&A

• Latest post-earnings management commentary reviewed: October 13 leadership reorganization; October 19 BDR sales facility and Inter Seguros agreement

• Price snapshot date: 2026-11-04

• Price snapshot time / timezone: Regular-session close, America/New_York (including exchange half-days)

• Competitor / analyst-Q&A audit: 2026-10-28 historical scope correction; 2026-11-04 operating context, valuation and Q&A read-through refreshed.

What's Changed Since Previous Review

Current Review: 2026-11-04

Previous Review: 2026-10-28 (competitor and Q&A audit; original operating assumptions were dated October 21)

Update Trigger: Comprehensive investment and valuation reassessment after the October BDR dislocation; new leadership and insurance developments; revised bank-moat and ROE underwriting.

Area	Previous View	Current View	Investment Impact
Operating fundamentals	Q2 2026 revenue, ARPAC and net income improving, with payroll delinquencies elevated	Same latest quarter; no Q3 earnings available as of November 4	Business trends unchanged; credit risk receives greater weight
Competition and moat	Moderate digital distribution and product moat; stable	Low-cost deposits and distribution are useful, but network effects and switching costs are limited; Nubank substantially more efficient	Higher hurdle to justify a terminal valuation premium
Capital and events	General capital/credit monitoring	BDR program conversion creates potential forced supply through November 17; new operations leadership and agreement to acquire insurance minority	Technical dislocation may be temporary, while underwriting and acquisition cash use require monitoring
Fair values	Bear $3.42 / Base $9.07 / Bull $17.88; weighted $9.14	Bear $2.53 / Base $6.90 / Bull $12.39; weighted $6.69	Central weighted FV declines 26.8% on more conservative EPS and terminal multiples
Valuation confidence and risk	48/100, Medium-High	42/100, High	Credit seasoning, currency, governance and outcome dispersion warrant additional caution
Quality and ranking	70.9 / B; Opportunity 71.0 / #4 at November 3 close	Quality retained at 70.9 / B; Opportunity 65.4 / #16 after valuation reassessment	Rank is provisional because INTR uses November 4 close while other companies use November 3 closes

Thesis determination: More conservatively underwritten / weaker valuation confidence, not a newly evidenced decline in Q2 operating performance. No claim is made that the BDR sales facility caused any exact percentage of the stock-price decline. Q3 earnings remain scheduled for November 12.

Investment Snapshot

Substantive valuation refresh (2026-11-04): INTR's November 4 close is updated, and its scenarios, confidence, zones, Opportunity Score and rank are independently reassessed. Other tracked names retain November 3 price snapshots, so the shared rank is provisional until the next complete-universe refresh.

Metric	Current View
Price Snapshot	$3.95 — 2026-11-04 regular-session close, America/New_York
Rating / Zone Status	Buy — speculative
Bear / Base / Bull Fair Value	$2.53 / $6.90 / $12.39
Scenario Probabilities	30% / 50% / 20%
Probability-Weighted Fair Value	$6.69
Probability-Weighted Expected Return	+69.4%
Bear-Case Return	-35.9%
Strong Buy Zone	≤ $2.78
Buy Zone	>$2.78–$5.35
Avoid Chasing Above	> $7.43
Quality Score / Tier	70.9 / Tier B
Opportunity Score / Rank	65.4 / #16 of 76 (provisional shared rank)
Risk Level	High
Tracking / Ownership	Primary Watchlist / Not Owned

Decision rationale: Speculative Buy at $3.95 because cheaper deposits and improving monetization could generate materially higher future ROE, while near-term forced BDR sales may be amplifying price pressure. The discount to reported book value is not a bargain by itself: underwriting must establish higher through-cycle ROE and seasoned credit quality. Confidence is only 42/100, so avoid treating the sharp selloff as a standalone investment catalyst.

Investment Thesis

Inter is already a profitable Brazilian digital bank with meaningful deposit funding, customers and payment activity. Its low-cost distribution and integrated account, cards, credit, investments and insurance can drive revenue per active customer and incremental earnings without proportionate servicing expenses. However, a broad super-app is not a proprietary network, and the bank lacks evidence of an unassailable underwriting or switching-cost moat. It does not need to overtake Nubank or Itaú to compound per-share value: it must grow deposits and loans while producing returns above the true cost of equity.

The investment debate is whether stronger underlying returns on equity (currently 16.3% for Q2) can emerge as customers mature, or whether rapidly growing private-payroll and credit-card exposures consume the apparent operating leverage through future loss recognition. A significant recent equity selloff also coincides with the October 19–November 17 BDR sales facility; a temporary supply imbalance is plausible but cannot be quantified from the filings.

What the Market May Be Mispricing

Debate	Research judgment
Credit-seasoned ROE	Improving customer economics are real but 18–20%+ sustainable ROE is not yet demonstrated
Below-book share price	At ~0.85× book, the bank could be fairly priced if persistent ROE falls short of required equity returns; book value is not a liquidation floor
BDR conversion selling	Official sales facility is confirmed, but neither the exact stock-price impact nor eventual total sales is known
Competitive advantage	66%-of-CDI funding cost and low-cost payments distribution offer a moderate advantage; Nubank has much higher scale and efficiency
Risk and dilution	Private-payroll loss seasoning, capital requirements, BRL depreciation, family voting control and acquisition cash needs could reduce USD per-share returns

Business Overview

Inter provides digital banking, lending, investments, insurance distribution and related services, primarily in Brazil. Deposits fund a growing credit portfolio, while cards, payments and distribution fees broaden monetization. The platform seeks to become customers' primary financial relationship. Reported gross revenue, net interest income and net revenue have different definitions; deposits and funding liabilities are operating inputs rather than ordinary industrial-company debt.

Business Takeaway

Inter provides digital banking, lending, investments, insurance distribution and related services, primarily in Brazil. Primary-customer engagement, risk-adjusted NIM, ARPAC, cost to serve, nonperforming loans and return on equity are the key metrics.

Industry, TAM & Market Share

Brazil offers a large banking profit pool and substantial digital adoption. Incumbent banks, Nubank and other fintechs compete intensely. Inter's transactional customer reach exceeds its lending penetration, but capturing more credit exposure also means accepting more credit and funding risk. FX matters directly to U.S.-listed shareholders.

Market-Share Analysis

Comparable same-definition share data for the subject and its principal rivals were not established. TAM estimates and company-specific volume measures are not treated as directly comparable market shares. The positioning analysis below is more reliable than a table of unmatched percentages.

Competitive Scale / Position

Company / Platform	Primary Position	Relative Scale	Growth Direction	Investment Relevance
Nu (NU)	Direct in Brazil: digital deposits, cards and consumer credit	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Competes for primary banking relationships	Customer choice in the stated segment only
Itaú Unibanco (ITUB)	Direct in Brazil: deposits, lending and financial services	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Competes for Brazilian financial relationships	Customer choice in the stated segment only
Banco do Brasil; Bradesco; Santander Brasil	Direct in Brazil: retail banking and credit	Product scope; no matched operating-scale series	Incumbent alternatives in the same geography	Customer choice in the stated segment only

Industry Takeaway

FX matters directly to U.S.-listed shareholders. The base case requires evidence of profitable adoption within that market.

Customer Economics

Primary-customer engagement, risk-adjusted NIM, ARPAC, cost to serve, nonperforming loans and return on equity are the key metrics. Low acquisition costs are useful only if deposits are durable and lifetime credit losses remain controlled. Do not infer customer profitability from gross ARPAC before provisions and funding expenses.

Customer-Economics Takeaway

The economic test is Deposit funding, capital adequacy and FX. Do not infer customer profitability from gross ARPAC before provisions and funding expenses.

Competitive Landscape & Moat

Competitive Landscape

Brazilian deposits and lending determine the operating peer set. SoFi is excluded from direct competition because its U.S. franchise does not serve the same core market.

Competitor	Market Share	Positioning	Advantages vs. Company	Disadvantages vs. Company	Current Direction
Nu (NU)	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: digital deposits, cards and consumer credit	Large digital banking customer network	Country mix and credit seasoning differ	Competes for primary banking relationships
Itaú Unibanco (ITUB)	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: deposits, lending and financial services	Established funding, product breadth and distribution	Branch-based cost structure differs from digital Inter	Competes for Brazilian financial relationships
Banco do Brasil; Bradesco; Santander Brasil	No consistent comparable series	Direct in Brazil: retail banking and credit	Existing deposit and borrower relationships	Different channel costs and portfolio mixes	Incumbent alternatives in the same geography

Moat Assessment

Overall moat: Moderate at best; direction: developing, not yet proven through a full credit cycle. Inter's strongest defensible asset is low-cost deposit funding: funding expense near 66% of CDI at Q2 2026 suggests a useful spread advantage, provided deposits remain sticky as competitors adjust rates. Digital distribution and approximately 9% company-reported Pix transaction share signal meaningful engagement, but Pix is shared payment infrastructure, not an exclusive Inter network effect. The app combines banking, payments, credit, investing and insurance; cross-sell may create modest customer friction, but product features can be copied.

Potential moat	Assessment	Test
Deposit funding cost	Moderate	Persistently low cost of funds without unstable rate-sensitive deposits
Digital distribution	Moderate	Greater primary-bank engagement at stable acquisition and servicing cost
Switching costs	Low–moderate	More recurring multi-product relationships and durable balances
Brand	Moderate	Retained transaction share despite Nubank and incumbent responses
Underwriting and data	Unproven	Risk-adjusted NIM and through-cycle loss rates across seasoned cohorts
Network effects	Weak	Pix is a common Brazilian rail rather than Inter-owned infrastructure
Product differentiation	Low–moderate	Better customer economics, not just a wider menu of products

Nubank's Q2 2026 consolidated ROE (~33%) and efficiency ratio (~19.5%) exceed Inter's 16.3% and 42.1%. Customer and geographic definitions are not directly interchangeable. This gap is a reason not to assume Inter deserves Nubank's valuation multiple. Itaú's broader funding and credit franchise adds a separate incumbent hurdle.

Competitive Takeaway

A useful integrated platform and low service costs support a moderate advantage. The direct rivals determine commercial pressure; diversified or sector anchors provide valuation context and are not substitutes for direct competition.

Financial Profile

Historical Financials

Standardized period history (reviewed 2026-11-07): Completed issuer fiscal years only, plus actually disclosed standalone quarters and cumulative YTD for the latest open FY. Currency BRL, flows in millions, with fiscal dates defined by the issuer. Values marked derived come from disclosed period differences/sums, not TTM. Missing = N/D (not zero). The issuer reports net banking revenue and net income but industrial FCF is not an appropriate distributable-cash metric. The release reports Q2 net income R$421M. Issuer net revenue was R$2,441M in Q1 and approximately R$2,637M in Q2 (H1 approximately R$5,078M), but the historical standardized revenue is a different bank-income definition; these net revenues are excluded from the comparable history table. Standalone revenue and SBC remain N/D pending same-definition reconciliation; no fabricated FCF.

Period	Revenue	Growth	Gross Margin	Operating Margin	FCF	FCF Margin	SBC	Diluted Shares	Cash	Debt
FY2024	4,601	43.28%	N/A	N/A	-6,475	N/A	N/D	439	983.2	11,929
FY2025	5,985	30.08%	N/A	N/A	-4,460	N/A	N/D	444	3,138	18,141
Q1 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D
Q2 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D
H1 FY2026	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D	N/D

Financial Takeaways

Q2 2026 reported net revenue was ~R$2.64B (+31.7% year over year), net income ~R$421M (+34%), ROE 16.3%, 45.3M total customers and 26.4M active customers. Funding reached ~R$77.2B, with bank-level Basel capital near 14.4%, and risk-adjusted NIM was 5.86%. Net ARPAC of R$35.5 less cost to serve of R$13.2 gives ~R$22.2 of monthly customer contribution before all credit losses and corporate expenses.

The major offset is deteriorating credit quality: 90-day-plus NPLs were about 5.1% versus 4.4% a year earlier; cost of risk ~5.9% versus ~5.0%. Private payroll grew from ~R$0.7B to ~R$2.8B in twelve months. Earlier credit-card write-offs mechanically lowered reported NPLs by ~30 basis points without reducing the underlying economic loss. Do not extrapolate interest yields into permanent profitability before the loan books season.

Industrial FCF and EV/revenue are poor banking valuation measures because loan growth and funding dominate cash flow. The model therefore uses sustainable USD EPS after credit losses and required reinvestment, with Brazil and FX risk reflected in discount-rate and scenario choices.

Bank revenue, cash, debt and operating cash flow follow banking accounting. Industrial EV and CFO-minus-capex multiples are not used. The net revenue series is after financial costs; evaluate credit provisions, capital, funding and sustainable earnings together.

Financial direction: Improving — assess the reported trend alongside dilution and the balance sheet.

Management & Capital Allocation

Management has improved monetization and efficiency, but confidence in payroll lending must be tested against actual loss emergence rather than projected loan yields. On October 13, Inter announced that Francisco Santos was expected to take the Chief Growth Officer role and Alexandre Riccio's group-level operations responsibilities would include credit and collections; the potential control benefit is not yet measurable. On October 19, an agreement was reported for Banco Inter to acquire Wiz's remaining 39.75% interest in Inter Seguros for approximately R$409.5M, subject to adjustments and approvals. Greater ownership could enhance insurance economics but consumes capital.

Inter's dual-class / controlling-shareholder voting structure limits public shareholders' influence. Continue to monitor effective underwriting controls, risk appetite, capital ratios, funding resilience, acquisition returns and dilution.

Management Takeaway

The organizational changes may improve execution, but neither appointment nor insurance acquisition establishes superior underwriting performance. Sustained, risk-adjusted ROE and capital discipline matter more than headline loan origination growth.

Valuation

Current Valuation

Market-data snapshot: 2026-11-04 regular-session close, USD. The total share count, rather than only the publicly floated Class A share count, is used for economic market capitalization. Bank funding and loan-book liabilities make conventional enterprise valuation inappropriate for the investment thesis.

Metric	Value
Price Snapshot	$3.95 — 2026-11-04 regular-session close, America/New_York
Economic shares outstanding	441.51M (Class A + other economic classes; provider estimate)
Market Capitalization	~$1.74B ($3.95 × 441.51M)
Enterprise Value	N/A — not used for bank equity valuation
Trailing P/E	5.98×
Provider forward P/E	4.86×
P/B	0.85×
Price / tangible book	~1.00×
Latest quarterly ROE	16.3% (Q2 2026)

Comparable Company Analysis

Consistent provider and November 4 closing snapshot; consolidated bank ratios are not matched segment profitability. Peer forward earnings use provider estimates, not our independent Inter model.

Company	Relevance	Public / Private	Trailing P/E	Forward P/E	P/B	Growth / Margin / Risk Context
INTR — Inter & Co	Subject: Brazilian accounts, loans, payments	Public	5.98×	4.86×	0.85×	Emerging digital bank; improving ARPAC but payroll credit seasoning
NU — Nubank	Direct competitor in Brazilian deposits, cards and consumer lending; larger Latin American footprint	Public	16.33×	12.27×	4.23×	Much higher reported ROE and efficiency; different geography and scale
ITUB — Itaú Unibanco	Direct incumbent in Brazilian retail deposits and lending; diversified established bank	Public	9.30×	7.67×	1.76×	Stronger scale, mature distribution and underwriting; different funding mix
BBD — Bradesco	Direct incumbent in Brazilian retail accounts, loans and insurance	Public	5.71×	4.64×	0.66×	Lower-priced incumbent proves that below-book alone is not a bargain
Banco do Brasil; Santander Brasil	Direct incumbent Brazilian retail credit and deposit alternatives	Public subsidiaries / bank groups	N/D — no matched set	N/D — no matched set	N/D — no matched set	Operating competitors; no unmatched consolidated multiple imputed

Comparable takeaway: Inter is substantially cheaper than Nubank and Itaú but not than Bradesco. A sustained ROE advantage is required for a deserved premium; a low P/B without returns above the cost of equity is not a margin of safety. As an illustrative Gordon-growth cross-check, P/B = (ROE - g)/(Ke - g); with Ke 18% and long-run g 4%, 16% steady-state ROE implies ~0.86× book, whereas 20% implies ~1.14×. This differs from the separate 15% discount rate in the 2029 scenario valuation and is a sensitivity illustration, not a second independent fair value.

Valuation Scenarios

Present equity value is normalized 2029 USD EPS × terminal P/E divided by 1.15^3; no interim dividends included. Revenue-path assumptions and 454.9M forecast economic shares remain from the prior model as transparent scenario scaffolding; EPS and terminal multiples were independently reduced after reassessing credit risk and peer valuations. No 2029 scenario is management guidance or consensus.

Scenario	Key Assumptions	Fair Value	Probability	Probability Rationale	Return From Price Snapshot
Bear	3Y revenue CAGR 10%; sustainable 2029 EPS $0.55; 7× P/E; 15% discount; persistent credit losses and weaker BRL	$2.53	30%	Private-payroll seasoning and weaker capital/FX outcomes remain credible	-35.9%
Base	3Y revenue CAGR 22%; sustainable 2029 EPS $1.05; 10× P/E; 15% discount; better monetization and progressing ROE	$6.90	50%	Improving profitability with controlled provisioning, but still requires proof	+74.7%
Bull	3Y revenue CAGR 30%; sustainable 2029 EPS $1.45; 13× P/E; 15% discount; stronger primary-bank adoption and sustainable ROE >20%	$12.39	20%	Durable higher ROE and re-rating are possible but not established	+213.7%
Probability-Weighted	30% × $2.53 + 50% × $6.90 + 20% × $12.39	$6.69	100%	Judgmental scenario mix, no assumed dividend	+69.4%

Valuation Takeaway

• Primary valuation method: Present value of sustainable late-2029 USD equity earnings × scenario P/E; the three-year convention matches the existing workpaper, with no double deduction for bank funding liabilities.
• Independent re-underwriting: The prior bear/base/bull EPS ($0.65/$1.15/$1.70) and terminal P/Es (8×/12×/16×) were reduced to $0.55/$1.05/$1.45 and 7×/10×/13× respectively. Risks are credit seasoning, underproven moat, BRL translation and uncertain post-BDR liquidity. Scenario probabilities (30/50/20), discount rate (15%) and revenue/shares framework remain after review because the latest completed earnings quarter has not changed and those are useful controlled sensitivities.
• Cross-check methods: Below-book price requires examining sustainable ROE rather than treating tangible assets as immediately distributable; peer multiples vary widely, including Bradesco below book. The earnings and dilution bridge is recorded in the linked workpaper.
• Key valuation dependencies: Loan-loss seasoning, risk-adjusted NIM, low-cost deposit persistence, primary-customer monetization, capital requirements and FX.
• Valuation confidence / Risk Level: 42/100 / High. Cash-flow and credit outcomes remain wide and a substantial discount is warranted.
• Margin-of-safety conclusion: Strong Buy = min($6.69/1.50, $2.53×1.10) = $2.78; Buy upper = $6.69/1.25 = $5.35; Avoid above = $6.69/0.90 = $7.43. At $3.95, status is speculative Buy, not Strong Buy. The indicated 69.4% expected return is to present scenario fair values, not an annualized performance promise.

Analyst Questions

The following are original paraphrases of the complete Q2 2026 earnings-call's four material analyst question groups and management responses, not verbatim transcript excerpts. No newer quarterly earnings call was available as of this review.

Analyst / Firm	Core Question	Management Response	Research Read-Through
Eduardo Rosman / BTG Pactual	Was Q2's improvement in NIM partly due to temporary inflation or indexation timing rather than recurring spread gains? What could happen to NIM and loan-loss provisions as early-stage arrears increase?	Management identified an inflation-linked accounting timing effect and suggested adjusting reported Q1 and Q2 NIM by roughly 15 bps in opposite directions to compare underlying trends. It maintained an expectation for about 40 bps of annual improvement and cost of risk around 6%, subject to loan mix.	Normalize funding and indexation timing and do not extrapolate a single-quarter margin before provisions.
Mario Pierry / Bank of America	Can Inter continue near-30% credit growth despite household indebtedness, high rates and the macro cycle, and has government-backed renegotiation substantially improved collection outcomes?	Management pointed to small current lending penetration relative to its customer base and Brazilian market, arguing it can select better borrowers. Its discussion of renegotiation indicated approximately R$100M of program volume and a modest incremental pretax effect, not a broad credit cure.	Long-run loan growth only adds value if mature cohorts earn adequate returns after credit losses.
Labarta / Goldman Sachs	How should securities, FX and derivatives income be reconciled with sustainable NIM, and why has the coverage ratio fallen while credit risks are still elevated?	Management described offsetting hedges and reclassifications between securities/derivatives and underlying portfolios. It attributed part of coverage movement toward the mid-130% area to seasonality and payroll-loan loss emergence and indicated an approximate 130–135% band depending on portfolio evolution.	Evaluate consolidated NIM and the coverage/credit-loss trend together, not isolated financial statement lines.
Neha Agarwala / HSBC	Why was the credit-card write-off period shortened and how does this affect reported NPLs? Which collection and repricing changes could repair private-payroll credit quality?	Management explained that moving the write-off date from 360 to 330 days mechanically reduced reported consolidated NPLs by about 30 bps, without a corresponding reduction in provisions. It discussed borrower-employer relinking, renegotiation, insurance and tighter origination standards; rate caps restricted some loans.	Apparent NPL improvement may reflect accounting timing rather than real improvement in borrower performance.

Analyst-Q&A Takeaway

Q2 inflation-linked NIM timing and earlier write-offs both complicate the headline improvements. For Q3, prioritize vintage-level private-payroll collections, risk-adjusted margins, loan-loss coverage and the impact of tighter origination, rather than management confidence alone.

Thesis Monitoring

Driver	Current State	Positive Trigger / Catalyst	Negative Trigger / Falsifier	What It Changes
Sustainable ROE and ARPAC	Q2 ROE 16.3%; net ARPAC R$35.5 and cost to serve R$13.2	Sustained ROE ~18–20%+ with repeatable customer contribution and capital efficiency	ROE settles below required equity returns despite nominal revenue growth	Long-run justified P/B, EPS and base-case multiple
Payroll and credit-card loan seasoning	NPL 90+ ~5.1%; cost of risk ~5.9%; payroll delinquencies elevated; card write-offs moved earlier	Vintage collections and realized loss formation improve without mechanical reporting changes	Further credit cost escalation consumes yield gains or capital	Bear probability and sustainable EPS
Funding quality and capitalization	Funding ~R$77.2B; cost ~66% of CDI; Basel ratio ~14.4%	Deposit funding stays cheap and sticky through rate cycles; regulatory ratios remain resilient	Rate-sensitive deposit flight, weaker capital or repeated equity dilution	Moat, confidence and discount rate
Competitive advantage	Moderate funding/distribution moat; much smaller and less efficient than Nubank	Greater primary-bank usage and cross-sell at stable service/credit costs	Customer activity fails to translate into earnings or incumbents erase funding advantage	Moat quality, normalized earnings and multiples
BDR conversion supply and next earnings	Sales facility October 19–November 17; Q3 earnings scheduled November 12	Confirmed facility completion and credit results that support the thesis	Higher-than-feared sales overhang or poor Q3 underwriting indicators	Near-term volatility, confidence and scenario probabilities
FX and capital allocation	USD shares exposed to BRL earnings translation; insurance-stake purchase agreed	Strong USD earnings despite FX, acquisition returns above capital cost	Weaker BRL or costly growth/capital deployment dilutes owners	Per-share USD earnings and capital assumptions

Quality & Opportunity Scorecards

Quality Score

Component	Score	Weight	Weighted Contribution	Evidence
Business durability and economics	72	25%	18.0	Profitability and customer contribution improving, but sustainable ROE depends on loan seasoning and stable low-cost deposits.
Moat and competitive position	65	25%	16.3	Moderate funding/distribution advantages; weak proprietary network effects, limited switching costs and unproven credit-cycle underwriting.
Growth runway and durability	85	20%	17.0	Brazil offers a large banking profit pool and substantial digital adoption.
Financial quality and balance sheet	66	15%	9.9	Q2 gross revenue was approximately R$4.6 billion and net revenue R$2.6 billion.
Management, governance and capital allocation	65	15%	9.8	Management has improved monetization and efficiency.
Quality Score	70.9	100%	70.9	Weighted score, independent of ownership and current price

• Quality Tier: B
• Speculative override: None

Opportunity Score

Component	Raw Input	Normalized Score	Weight	Weighted Contribution
Quality	70.9	70.9	30%	21.3
Probability-weighted upside	+69.4%	100.0	35%	35.0
Bear-case downside	-35.9%	14.1	20%	2.8
Risk / valuation confidence	42	42.0	15%	6.3
Opportunity Score		65.4	100%	65.4

• Opportunity Rank: #16 of 76 (provisional mixed-date shared snapshot)
• Zone Status: Buy
• Score-change rationale: Substantive 2026-11-04 reassessment lowered weighted FV $9.14→$6.69 and confidence 48→42. Price $3.91→$3.95 contributes modestly; fundamental Quality 70.9 is preserved. Provisional rank compares INTR's November 4 close with other companies' November 3 closes; rerank the full 76-name universe at a common date on the next price refresh.

Portfolio Context

• Tracking tier: Primary Watchlist
• Owned: No
• Tracking source of truth: my_watchlist.md
• Portfolio source of truth: portfolio/holdings.md
• Scoring independence: Ownership, account, shares, position size and cost basis do not change research, valuation, Quality, Opportunity, rank or zones.

Investment Decision History

Timestamp	Price	Rating	Zone Status	Buy Zone	Strong Buy Zone	Avoid Chasing Above	Base FV	P/W FV	P/W Return	Quality	Opportunity / Rank	Change / Rationale
2026-10-21 (America/New_York)	$7.26	Buy	Buy	>$3.76–$7.31	≤ $3.76	> $10.16	$9.07	$9.14	+25.9%	70.9	63.5 / #17	Initial missing-file analysis; common-universe ranking; independent scenario assumptions
2026-11-04 close (fundamental and valuation refresh)	$3.95	Buy — speculative	Buy	>$2.78–$5.35	≤ $2.78	> $7.43	$6.90	$6.69	+69.4%	70.9	65.4 / #16	Underwritten lower USD EPS and terminal multiples; credit/competition/high risk lower confidence 48→42; near-term BDR sales; mixed-date rank provisional

---

Material Sources

Source	Type	Date / Period	What It Supports
www.sec.gov	Company IR / earnings filing	Q2 2026	Latest operating results, guidance, products and financial supplement
INTR complete earnings-call transcript	Transcript	Q2 2026	Prepared remarks and all material Q&A exchanges
INTR regular-session historical price	Market data	2026-10-20 original snapshot	Historical initial ranking price; superseded by November 4 market snapshot
INTR valuation statistics	Market data	2026-10-20 original snapshot	Historical initial comparable ratios; November 4 source row supersedes these values
INTR historical income statement	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical income statement; source-native currency and definitions
INTR historical balance sheet	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical balance sheet; source-native currency and definitions
INTR historical cash flows	Standardized financial statements	Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years	Historical cash flows; source-native currency and definitions
Nu Holdings Ltd. statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis
Itaú Unibanco statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis
SoFi Technologies, Inc. statistics	Comparable-company market data	2026-10-20 regular close	Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis

| Inter&Co BDR program notice | Company investor relations | September–November 2026 | BDR options and October 19–November 17 sales-facility period | | BDR sales-facility SEC notice | Regulatory filing | 2026-10-19 | Sales facility mechanism; liquidation timing and unresolved share quantity | | Inter leadership SEC announcement | Regulatory filing | 2026-10-13 | Growth and operations leadership responsibilities | | Wiz / Inter Seguros transaction report | Transaction report | 2026-10-19 | 39.75% minority insurance stake purchase; price and conditions | | NU Q2 2026 earnings release | Peer company results | Q2 2026 | Scale, activity, ROE and efficiency comparison (different geographic bases) | | INTR November 4 statistics | Market data | 2026-11-04 close | Price, 441.51M economic shares, market capitalization, earnings and book multiples | | NU November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted peer valuation metrics; consolidated Latin American mix | | ITUB November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted Brazilian bank valuation metrics | | BBD November 4 statistics | Comparable-company market data | 2026-11-04 close | Quoted Brazilian incumbent valuation metrics |