Palantir’s US Boom vs French Backlash: Why the Stock Can’t Break Free
20.06.2026 - 14:12:12 | boerse-global.de
France’s decision to replace Palantir’s software at the DGSI domestic intelligence service with homegrown rival ChapsVision has sent an unmistakable political signal across Europe. Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu made the announcement official, though the existing contract — extended in December 2025 for three more years — means Palantir’s tools will remain in use while the transition unfolds over several years. No immediate expulsion is on the cards, but the symbolic weight is heavy. European governments are growing wary of relying on US technology, and the concern is spreading beyond Paris to Berlin and London.
Yet the stock market has taken the news in its stride. Palantir shares inched up 0.74% on the week to close at €111.48 in Frankfurt on Friday (€111.62 per the primary source — slight difference, reconcile: primary says 111.62, secondary says 111.48. Both must be preserved? They are different data points from two different articles. We must preserve both? The rule says "every number from both sources must remain exactly the same". So we have two different closing prices. We could mention both as different exchanges or times? Or we can choose one? Actually both sources are about the same asset, likely same closing price but one might be from a different source. Better to check: primary says "Am Freitag schloss die Aktie bei 111,62 Euro." secondary says "Der Schlusskurs am Freitag lag bei 111,48 Euro." That's a discrepancy. Possibly one is the Xetra close and the other is a different exchange? But we must preserve both facts. We can say "the stock closed at €111.62 on one exchange and €111.48 on another" but that's speculative. Alternatively, we can use the more common one or note a range. Since we must not invent info, we should not attribute to exchanges. Better to use the primary's 111.62 as it's more prominent? But both are authoritative. The instruction: "Preserve ALL FACTS: Every number, percentage, date, and data point from both sources must remain exactly the same." That means we cannot ignore either. We can present: "the stock closed at €111.62 on Friday according to one report, while another showed €111.48" – that seems awkward. Alternatively, we can use one number and note the other in a different sentence. Let's see: primary says 111.62, secondary says 111.48. Perhaps the difference is due to rounding or time. I'll use 111.62 as it appears in the primary article which is the longer one, and mention "a separate report gave a marginally lower close of €111.48". That preserves both. Or we can embed both in the same sentence: "The stock ended Friday at €111.62 per one source and €111.48 per another, reflecting thin trading." But that might be too obvious. Let's just use one and keep the other for later? But the rule says "preserve exactly". Probably best to acknowledge both. I'll use "the shares changed hands at €111.62 in Frankfurt, though a slightly different close of €111.48 was also reported." That's acceptable as it doesn't invent explanation.
Anyway, the muted reaction reflects a broader dynamic: Palantir’s US commercial engine is firing on all cylinders, dwarfing the European political noise.
That engine was on full display in the first quarter. Revenue surged 85% year-on-year to $1.63 billion, operating margin hit 46%, and management raised its 2026 revenue forecast to as much as $7.66 billion. The US commercial segment is the star, with net revenue retention at 150% and remaining performance obligations climbing 97%. For the period from 2026 to 2029, Wolfe Research now sees a baseline annual revenue growth rate of 39%, with an upside scenario of 55%.
Should investors sell immediately? Or is it worth buying Palantir?
Wolfe’s analysts ended years of bearishness by upgrading Palantir from “Underperform” to “Peer Perform” — an admission that the growth profile has become too compelling to ignore. They highlighted the AIP platform, the Ontology database, and the Forward-Deployed Engineering model as core differentiators. Yet they declined to set a price target and stopped short of a buy rating. The reason: valuation. Palantir trades at roughly 30 times 2027 revenue and 65 times earnings — about double the multiple of comparable software companies. Even with all the growth, the market is demanding a steep premium.
UBS disagrees, sticking with its buy rating and a $200 price target. But the competition is closing in. OpenAI, Anthropic and Databricks are building their own deployment teams and data layers that mimic Palantir’s Ontology approach. Palantir insists its system goes beyond pure LLM queries to deliver operational outcomes, but the question of how wide and deep its moat truly is remains open.
Technically, the stock is stuck in no-man’s land. It closed the week about 6% above its 52-week low of €104.96 but nearly 40% below the November high of €179.98. All major moving averages sit above the current price: the 50-day line at €118.55 and the 200-day at €136.94. The RSI of 41.8 shows no overheating, while the 30-day annualised volatility of nearly 53% underscores lingering nervousness.
Palantir at a turning point? This analysis reveals what investors need to know now.
Palantir’s own raised guidance sets a clear bar: revenue of around $7.65 billion, US commercial sales exceeding $3.2 billion, and free cash flow between $4.2 billion and $4.4 billion. As long as American commercial growth continues to outpace European government defections, the story remains intact. But with the stock trading below its trend lines and political risk spreading, the premium that investors are willing to pay will face persistent scrutiny.
Ad
Palantir Stock: New Analysis - 20 June
Fresh Palantir information released. What's the impact for investors? Our latest independent report examines recent figures and market trends.
