1. Company Overview & Business Model

1.1 The “Buy-and-Build” Serial Acquirer Model

Judges Scientific Plc (Judges) is not a traditional, operationally integrated industrial company. It is a specialist holding company, listed on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange, whose entire business model is centered on a “buy-and-build” strategy.¹ The Group’s purpose is to acquire and develop companies within the highly specialized scientific instrument sector.³

The company’s value creation model is built on a highly disciplined acquisition framework. Judges targets established, profitable, and cash-generative businesses that have already secured strong reputations within global niche markets.³ A cornerstone of this strategy is rigorous capital discipline; the company explicitly targets acquisitions at purchase multiples of 3 to 7 times EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes).²

1.2 Corporate Structure: A Decentralized Federation of Niche Specialists

The Group’s corporate structure is a key competitive advantage. As of late 2025, Judges consists of 25 distinct businesses.¹ The post-acquisition strategy is not one of aggressive integration, cost-stripping, or centralization. Instead, Judges operates a decentralized model, allowing its subsidiaries to retain their brand, management teams, and operational autonomy.²

The parent company provides robust financial controls, governance oversight, and access to capital for growth projects.² This model, which offers a “permanent home” for acquired businesses ⁶, is highly attractive to the founders of private, specialized companies who are seeking to sell their business but are concerned about preserving their legacy and protecting their employees. This cultural proposition often makes Judges the “buyer of choice,” allowing it to maintain its pricing discipline even in a competitive M&A market, thereby protecting its high returns on investment.

1.3 Operating Segments & Subsidiary Portfolio

Judges reports its diverse portfolio of companies across two main operating segments.⁵ For the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024, the Group’s £133.6 million in revenue was generated by these segments ¹⁰:

• Vacuum (52% of FY24 Revenue): This segment, contributing £69.0 million, comprises businesses whose instruments primarily operate in a vacuum environment.¹⁰ Key subsidiaries include:

• Quorum Technologies: A market leader in manufacturing instruments for electron microscopy (EM) sample preparation.¹¹
• Scientifica: Develops and manufactures pioneering equipment for life science research, particularly in the fields of electrophysiology and neuroscience.¹²
• Materials Sciences (48% of FY24 Revenue): This segment, contributing £64.6 million, includes businesses focused on the testing and analysis of materials.¹⁰ Key subsidiaries include:

• Geotek: Acquired in May 2022, this is the Group’s largest-ever acquisition.¹² It specializes in high-resolution, non-destructive analysis of geological cores.¹³
• Fire Testing Technology (FTT): Recognized as the world’s leading supplier of fire testing instrumentation, such as cone calorimeters, to research institutions and testing laboratories.¹¹
• GDS Instruments: Manufactures advanced systems for testing the engineering properties of soil and rock.⁵
• Teer Coatings & Rockwash Geodata: Both acquired in 2024. Teer Coatings specializes in Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) coating systems ², while Rockwash provides digitalization services for rock cuttings, which is highly synergistic with Geotek.²

A critical element of the current business model is the 2022 acquisition of Geotek. This transaction represented a strategic pivot, as it was the Group’s first major acquisition with a substantial services component (i.e., conducting geological coring expeditions) in addition to instrument sales.¹⁶ While this provides greater medium-term visibility, it also introduces a “reliance on a small number of large contracts” ¹⁶, fundamentally changing the Group’s risk profile by adding “lumpy” project-based revenue.¹⁷

1.4 Customer Profile & Global End-Market Exposures

The Group’s customer base is highly diversified, mitigating risk from any single entity or geography. Judges is a strong exporter, with over 85% of revenue generated outside the UK.² As of the 2024 Annual Report, its geographic exposure was: Rest of Europe (27%), North America (25%), and China/Hong Kong (10%, down from 14% in 2023).⁵

Typical customers are “sticky” and include:

• Higher education institutions (universities)
• Scientific research facilities
• Manufacturing companies (for quality control and R&D)
• Regulatory authorities ³

End-market exposures are varied, with key concentrations in Geotechnical, Life Science/Semiconductors, and general Industry Optimisation.²

2. Industry Dynamics & Market Position

2.1 The Niche Scientific Instruments Market: Fragmentation and Consolidation

The global market for analytical and scientific instruments is a large and structurally attractive industry. Market forecasts project strong, non-cyclical growth, with various reports estimating a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6-7%, leading to a market size of $75 billion to $100 billion by the early 2030s.¹⁹

While a handful of multi-billion dollar conglomerates dominate the high end of the market, the industry as a whole remains highly fragmented.²² This fragmentation is a key enabler of the Judges Scientific strategy. The “giants” of the industry are focused on broad, high-volume platforms, which leaves thousands of highly specialized, niche applications (like EM sample prep or fire testing) served by smaller, private companies. Judges’ decentralized model is specifically designed to acquire and cultivate these #1 or #2 players in markets that are structurally “off-the-radar” of the largest competitors.

2.2 Competitive Landscape: Giants vs. Niche Leaders

Judges Scientific’s competitive positioning must be viewed on two levels:

1. Subsidiary-Level Competition: At the product level, Judges’ 25 subsidiaries do not compete with each other. They operate as dominant leaders in their respective global niches.³ Their competitors are other small-to-medium-sized specialists.
2. Group-Level Competition: As a “buy-and-build” compounder, Judges’ true strategic and valuation peers are not other instrument makers like Thermo Fisher or Agilent.²⁰ Instead, its relevant peer group consists of other high-quality, UK-listed industrial technology acquirers, such as Halma plc (HLMA.LSE) ²⁴, Diploma PLC (DPLM.LSE) ²⁵, and Spirax-Sarco Engineering plc (SPX.LSE).²⁶

Compared to these more diversified peers, Judges’ differentiation is its singular focus on the scientific instrument vertical. This provides deep domain expertise for sourcing and vetting acquisitions but also concentrates its risk profile on a single end-market: global R&D spending.

2.3 Judges’ Competitive Moat

The Group’s economic moat is not a single, wide moat, but rather the sum of 25 distinct, deep, “narrow moats” held by its subsidiaries. This collective advantage is built on four pillars:

• Niche Dominance: Each company typically holds a #1 or #2 market share in a niche that is too small to attract the interest of large-scale competitors.³
• High Switching Costs: The instruments are mission-critical, low-cost components of a much larger R&D or quality control process. Once “specified in” to a customer’s workflow, the cost, time, and risk of switching to a new supplier are prohibitively high.
• Technical & Regulatory Barriers: The subsidiaries are centers of excellence ³ built on deep intellectual property and technical know-how. This is supported by significant R&D investment (6.3% of Group revenue in 2024 ⁵) and complex regulatory knowledge ¹¹, which deter low-cost entrants.²⁷
• The M&A Model Itself: As detailed, the “permanent home” structure ² provides a competitive advantage in the market for acquisitions, allowing Judges to deploy capital at attractive, disciplined multiples (3-7x EBIT).²

2.4 Key Industry Drivers & Cyclical Factors

Long-term, secular growth for the industry is propelled by rising global R&D expenditure ²¹, increasing demand for regulatory compliance and product safety, and technological advancements in fields like biotechnology, nanotechnology, and precision medicine.²¹

The industry’s cyclicality is not tied to general industrial production. Instead, it is highly sensitive to the funding cycles of its core customers: universities, research labs, and government agencies.³ This specific cyclicality was the primary driver of the Group’s recent trading challenges, with performance in 2024 and 2025 being directly and materially impacted by “reductions in US federal government research funding”.⁴

3. Historical Financial Performance & Growth

3.1 Ten-Year Financial Review: Revenue, Profit & Cash Flow

Judges Scientific has an exceptional long-term track record of compounding shareholder value. The company has consistently grown revenue, profits, and dividends through its disciplined “buy-and-build” approach. This consistent performance was interrupted in 2024, a year management described as “difficult,” which saw a significant downturn in profitability due to a combination of the Geotek project delay and weakness in China.⁵

Table 1: 10-Year Financial Summary (2015-2024)

Fiscal Year	Revenue (£M)	Adj. Operating Profit* (£M)	Adj. Operating Margin* (%)	Adj. Basic EPS* (p)	Dividend per Share (p)
2015	56.2	9.9	17.6%	76.5	22.0
2016	57.3	9.1	15.9%	63.3	24.2
2017	71.4	12.8	17.9%	100.2	27.5
2018	77.9	15.1	19.4%	128.8	32.0
2019	81.9	18.0	22.0%	151.7	40.0
2020	79.9	15.5	19.4%	128.7	44.0
2021	91.3	20.3	22.2%	129.0	55.0
2022	113.2	26.5	23.4%	198.0	69.0
2023	136.1	34.8	25.6%	374.6	85.0
2024	133.6	27.9	20.9%	283.4	104.5

Sources: 2

*Adjusted figures are management’s Alternative Performance Measures (APMs), primarily excluding non-cash amortization of acquired intangible assets and acquisition-related costs.5

3.2 Deconstructing the Growth Engine: Organic vs. M&A

The Group’s total revenue CAGR of 21% over 18 years ¹² is driven by both M&A and organic growth.

• Inorganic (M&A) Growth: This has historically been the primary driver of headline growth, reflecting the successful serial acquisition strategy.
• Organic Growth: Management’s long-term target and historical achievement is an 8% organic revenue CAGR.² This is a critical metric, as it demonstrates that Judges is acquiring healthy, growing businesses, not just “rolling up” stagnant assets.

The 2024 performance represented a significant break from this trend. The Group reported an organic revenue decline of 7.6%.⁵ While management attributed this to the specific Geotek and China issues ¹⁴, a key question for investors is whether this was a one-off event or if it signals a maturation and slowing of the core portfolio.

3.3 Profitability Analysis: Margin Trajectory and Return on Equity (ROE)

Profitability has historically been strong, reflecting the high-margin, niche-dominant nature of the subsidiaries. The adjusted operating margin peaked at 25.6% in 2023 before contracting by 470 basis points to 20.9% in 2024.⁵ This compression highlights the Group’s significant operational leverage; the profit decline was much steeper than the 1.8% revenue decline, as fixed costs were under-absorbed during the downturn.

The Group’s 10-year average Return on Equity (ROE) is a robust 19.1%.³¹ Reflecting the 2024 profit slump, the trailing-twelve-month (TTM) ROE fell to approximately 12.0%.³¹

3.4 Analysis of Key Metric: Return on Total Invested Capital (ROTIC)

Return on Total Invested Capital (ROTIC) is management’s most important Key Performance Indicator (KPI) for measuring the success of its capital allocation and the “buy-and-build” model.⁵ The Group has a medium-term target of 30% ROTIC.⁵

However, this metric has seen a sharp and concerning deterioration, coinciding with the Group’s pivot to larger, more expensive acquisitions like Geotek.² The trend is as follows:

• FY 2023: 22.7% ⁵
• FY 2024: 16.5% ⁵
• H1 2025 (TTM): 17.9% ⁴

This decline from 22.7% to 16.5% is a central component of the bear thesis. It strongly suggests that the 2022 Geotek acquisition, which was larger and acquired at a higher multiple (7.5x pre-COVID EBIT) than the historical 3-7x range ¹⁶, is, to date, proving less capital-efficient and generating lower returns. This directly challenges the scalability of the M&A model, suggesting that as Judges is forced to do larger deals to “move the needle,” it may be sacrificing the high return efficiency that defined its past success.

3.5 Balance Sheet, Working Capital & Historical Cash Conversion

Cash conversion is a critical KPI, as the model relies on internally generated cash to fund dividends and new acquisitions.⁵ The Group’s performance on this metric remains a key strength.

• FY 2023: Cash conversion was 90%.⁵
• FY 2024: Despite the “difficult year,” cash conversion was “restored to normal levels” at an impressive 122%.⁵ This demonstrates high earnings quality and strong working capital management.
• H1 2025: Cash conversion was a healthy 86%.³⁴

4. Recent Developments & Performance (2023-2025)

4.1 Navigating the 2024 Downturn: A “Difficult Trading Year”

Fiscal year 2024 was a significant challenge for the Group.¹⁴ After years of consistent growth, revenue declined 1.8% to £133.6M ¹⁰, and organic revenue fell 7.6%.⁵ The impact on profit was more severe due to operational leverage, with adjusted PBT falling 23% to £24.3M and adjusted EPS falling 24% to 283.4p.³⁴

Management clearly identified two primary, non-operational causes:

1. Geotek Project Delay: The delay of a single, large coring expedition.¹⁴
2. China Weakness: A “general weakness in order intake, particularly in China” ¹⁴, where organic orders in H1 2024 had collapsed by 65%.²

Despite the poor trading, the M&A engine remained “buoyant,” with three acquisitions completed, funded by the Group’s excellent 122% cash conversion.⁵

4.2 H1 2025 Results: A “Mixed Picture” of Geotek Strength and Organic Weakness

The interim results for the six months ending June 30, 2025, (released September 18, 2025) presented a “mixed picture” that requires careful analysis.⁴

• Headline Growth: On the surface, the results appeared to be a strong recovery. Revenue rose 15% to £70.2M, adjusted PBT rose 17% to £12.6M, and adjusted basic EPS rose 14% to 141.4p.⁴
• The Underlying Reality: This headline growth was deceptive. Management commentary was transparent, stating the growth was overwhelmingly driven by “Geotek perform[ing] strongly, including [the] coring expedition” that had been delayed from 2024.⁴
• Core Weakness: This strength from one large contract masked continued softness elsewhere. The results were “offset by reduced profitability in the wider Organic group”.⁴ This confirms that the weakness in the core portfolio seen in 2024 had persisted into 2025.

The organic order book remained solid at 17.4 weeks, providing some visibility.⁴

4.3 Analysis of Macroeconomic Headwinds

The H1 2025 results clearly identified the primary cause of the core “Organic group” weakness:

• USA: The US market, representing 25% of revenue, was the key headwind. This was described as “subdued trading” and “difficult market conditions”.⁴ The weakness was explicitly linked to “reductions in US federal government research funding” ⁴, a direct hit to Judges’ core customer base.
• China: In contrast, the China/Hong Kong market, which was the major headwind in 2024, “recovered from a difficult first half of 2024”.⁴

4.4 Strategic M&A Activity (2024)

The 2024 trading downturn did not halt the company’s primary growth engine. Judges demonstrated the resilience of its cash-generative model by completing three acquisitions during the year ¹⁴:

• Luciol Instruments SA (June 2024): A Swiss-based maker of optic fibre instruments, acquired for CHF 2.0 million plus an earn-out. This deal is complementary to the existing subsidiary PE.Fiberoptics.²
• Rockwash Geodata Ltd (June 2024): A Welsh company specializing in the digitalization of rock cuttings, acquired for £2.25 million plus an earn-out. This acquisition is “strongly synergistic with Geotek”.²
• Teer Coatings Ltd (August 2024): A UK-based PVD coating instrument and services business, acquired for £12.3 million.²

These deals show a continued focus on synergistic, bolt-on acquisitions that strengthen existing Group capabilities.

5. Growth Opportunities & Strategy

5.1 Management’s Dual-Pronged Growth Strategy

Management’s strategy is consistent, well-defined, and focused on two drivers:

1. Inorganic (M&A): To acquire high-quality, niche scientific instrument businesses at disciplined valuations.⁵
2. Organic: To foster “continued profitable performance and growth at its existing subsidiary businesses”.⁵

This organic growth is not left to chance; it is driven by a formal “Organic model”.² This model acts as a professionalization toolkit for the acquired businesses, providing Group-level support in:

• Finance and Governance: Implementing robust financial controls.
• Operational Excellence: Establishing KPIs and benchmarking.
• Talent Development: Running leadership development programs.
• Strategy and Ambition: A structured process to identify growth drivers and encourage investment in new products.²

5.2 The M&A Pipeline and Disciplined Valuation Criteria

The M&A engine appears to be re-accelerating, not slowing down. The company has actively increased its capacity for future deals.

• Financial Capacity: In July 2024, Judges amended and extended its banking facilities to a total of £140 million (£90 million Revolving Credit Facility (RCF) + £50 million uncommitted accordion), maturing in July 2028.² With leverage at only 1.5x (versus a 3.0x covenant) ², the Group has substantial financial “firepower” for new acquisitions.
• Human Capital: In June 2025, the company strengthened its deal team by appointing a new “Group Acquisitions Executive”.⁴
• Discipline: The company’s commitment to its 3-7x EBIT valuation criteria remains paramount.² The H1 2025 report noted that no acquisitions were completed in the period because the Group “continues to apply strict M&A criteria” ³⁵, signaling that it will not overpay to chase growth.

5.3 Organic Growth Initiatives & R&D

The primary driver of organic growth is investment in new product development. In 2024, the Group invested £8.4 million in research and development, equivalent to 6.3% of Group revenue.⁵ This is a substantial level of investment for a decentralized holding company and is critical for maintaining the subsidiaries’ technological edge and niche-dominant positions.

6. Capital Allocation & Shareholder Returns

6.1 A Disciplined Capital Deployment Framework

Judges’ capital allocation priorities are clear, consistent, and executed with discipline:

1. Acquisitions: Reinvesting operating cash flow into new, earnings-enhancing acquisitions is the top priority.²
2. Organic Investment: Funding R&D and capital expenditures within the existing subsidiaries to drive organic growth.⁵
3. Dividends: Providing a progressive and reliable dividend to shareholders.¹²
4. Debt Reduction: Using excess cash flow to pay down acquisition-related debt and maintain a strong balance sheet.²

Share buybacks are not a meaningful part of the capital allocation strategy, though the company does make small purchases for its Share Incentive Plan.³⁹

6.2 Dividend Policy: The 10% Annual Growth Mandate

The dividend is a core component of the shareholder return proposition.

• Official Policy: The company maintains a stated policy “of increasing the dividend by a minimum of 10% per year”.⁵
• Track Record: This policy is backed by a powerful track record. Since 2006, the dividend has grown at a compound annual rate of 22-23%.⁵
• A Signal of Confidence: The most potent signal of management’s long-term confidence occurred in the H1 2025 results. Despite the “challenging environment,” “difficult market conditions in the USA,” and “reduced profitability in the wider Organic group” ⁴, the Board raised the interim dividend by exactly 10% to 32.7p per share.⁴ This non-verbal communication signals that the Board views the current headwinds as temporary and that the long-term cash-generative nature of the model is fully intact. The dividend is well-covered at 4.2x-4.3x adjusted earnings.⁸

6.3 Prudent Balance Sheet Management & Acquisition Financing

The Group finances acquisitions primarily through cash flow and its revolving credit facility.² Management is committed to “maintaining a prudent gearing position”.⁵ As detailed in the next section, leverage remains low, providing ample flexibility.

6.4 Insider Ownership: High Alignment (9.2% CEO Stake) and Recent Purchases

Shareholder alignment is exceptionally high.

• CEO Ownership: As of September 2025, founder and CEO David Cicurel holds 611,375 shares, representing 9.2% of the company’s issued share capital.⁴⁰
• Recent Insider Buying: Directors have been net purchasers of shares in 2025. This includes a significant purchase in October 2025 by Non-Executive Director Lushani Kodituwakku, who acquired 1,766 shares for £101,192.⁴¹ This is in addition to regular, smaller share purchases by all executive directors, including the CEO and CFO, through the company’s Share Incentive Plan.⁴²

7. Financial Health & Risk Factors

7.1 Current Debt Levels and Covenant Position

Judges maintains a strong and flexible balance sheet. The Group’s financial health is robust, with significant headroom to fund its growth strategy.

Table 2: Debt & Covenant Analysis (as of June 30, 2025)

Metric	Value	Covenant / Facility	Headroom / Status
Adjusted Net Debt	£45.7 M	–	–
Statutory Net Debt	£50.4 M	–	–
Cash Balances	£18.9 M	–	–
Total Bank Facility	£140.0 M	Matures July 2028	£90M RCF + £50M Accordion
Gearing (Adj. Net Debt / EBITDA)	1.5x	$\leq 3.0\text{x}$	Significant Headroom (50%)
Interest Cover	Not Quantified	$\geq 3.0\text{x}$	“Significant headroom” 37

Sources: ²

7.2 Exposure to Interest Rate Fluctuations

This risk is actively managed and has been largely neutralized. The Group’s debt is charged at a variable rate (SONIA) plus a margin.⁵ However, following the July 2024 refinancing, the company “entered into additional interest rate swaps for the SONIA portion… with swapped rates ranging between 3.2% in 2025 to 3.7% in 2027/2028”.⁵ This effectively fixes the Group’s interest cost, insulating the income statement from interest rate volatility.

7.3 Risk Factor: The “Lumpy” Nature of Geotek Service Revenue

The most significant new business risk is the earnings volatility introduced by the Geotek acquisition. Historically, the Group’s revenue was highly diversified across 20+ businesses selling smaller-ticket items. The 2024 Annual Report now includes a specific principal risk: “the potential absence of a coring expedition in a particular year may affect the Group’s ability to show regularly increasing earnings”.³⁶

This risk was immediately realized:

• 2024: The “difficult trading year” was primarily caused by the delay of a Geotek expedition.¹⁴
• H1 2025: The 15% revenue growth was primarily caused by the recognition of that delayed expedition.⁴

The company’s earnings profile is now fundamentally “lumpier” and less predictable than it was pre-2022.¹⁷ The timing of the next Geotek expedition is a key uncertainty for H2 2025 and beyond.⁴

7.4 Risk Factor: End-Market Concentration & US/China Exposure

The Group is vulnerable to macroeconomic and political factors in its key markets. This was demonstrated by the 33% decline in China/Hong Kong revenue in 2024 ⁵ and the “difficult market conditions in the USA” in H1 2025, specifically linked to cuts in US federal research funding.⁴ Political tensions and trade wars are a named risk.⁵

7.5 Risk Factor: Key Personnel & CEO Succession

This is arguably the single greatest risk to the long-term investment thesis. The risk exists on two levels:

1. Subsidiary Level: The decentralized model is dependent on retaining the high-quality senior management and key technical personnel at its 25 subsidiaries. The 2024 Annual Report identifies this as a principal risk, as “it can sometimes take a long time to replace” these specialist executives.⁵
2. Group Level (CEO Succession): This is the paramount “key-man risk.” CEO David Cicurel is 76 years old.⁴⁴ He founded the company, owns 9.2% of its shares ⁴⁰, and is the chief architect of the M&A strategy and culture.⁴⁵ His eventual departure creates a massive strategic and cultural vacuum. This “transition of leadership is the key overhang” on the stock.⁴⁷ The risk is amplified by the fact that the rest of his long-tenured team is also transitioning: founding Chairman Alex Hambro retired in 2025 ³⁶, and COO Mark Lavelle announced his intention to retire by September 2026.⁴

8. Valuation Analysis

8.1 Current Valuation Metrics

As of early November 2025, Judges Scientific’s valuation metrics are as follows:

• Share Price: approx. £54.20 ⁴⁹
• Market Capitalization: approx. £364.5 million ⁵⁰
• Shares Outstanding: 6.65 million ⁴⁰
• Enterprise Value (EV): approx. £404.4 million ⁵¹
• P/E (TTM): 33.6x.⁵⁰ This statutory P/E is elevated due to the non-cash amortization of acquired intangibles, which depresses statutory earnings.
• EV/EBITDA (TTM): 13.4x.⁵² This is a more relevant metric for a serial acquirer, as it is independent of capital structure and non-cash charges.
• P/FCF: The stock appears attractive on a cash flow basis. With a TTM FCF Margin of 21.2% ⁵¹ and a P/S ratio of 2.5x ⁵¹, the implied P/FCF is approximately 11.7x.

8.2 Historical Valuation Ranges

The stock has undergone a severe de-rating. The current share price of ~£54 is near its 52-week low of £51 and roughly 47% below its 52-week high of £103.50.⁴⁹ The market capitalization has fallen approximately 34% from its year-end 2024 level and 52% from its 2023 peak.⁵⁴ This collapse reflects the 2024 earnings decline, the new uncertainty from Geotek, and the persistent CEO succession overhang.

8.3 Valuation Relative to Comparable Companies

The core of the valuation analysis rests on comparing Judges to its peer group of high-quality, UK-listed “buy-and-build” compounders. On this basis, Judges Scientific appears to trade at a significant discount.

Table 3: Valuation Peer Group Comparison (TTM as of Nov 2025)

Company (Ticker)	Market Cap (GBP)	P/E (TTM)	EV/EBITDA (TTM)
Judges Scientific (JDG.LSE)	£0.36 B	33.6x	13.4x
Halma (HLMA.LSE)	£12.8 B	43.4x	24.8x
Diploma (DPLM.LSE)	£7.2 B	42.6x	23.1x
Spirax-Sarco (SPX.LSE)	£5.2 B	31.6x	15.7x
Spectris (SXS.LSE)	£4.1 B	70.7x	27.3x

Sources:.⁵⁰ P/E for SXS appears distorted.

8.4 Analysis of the Valuation Premium/Discount

The peer comparison table (Table 3) is stark. Judges Scientific trades at a massive EV/EBITDA discount of 40-50% relative to its higher-quality, larger-cap peers, Halma (24.8x) and Diploma (23.1x). It also trades at a material discount to the more cyclical Spirax-Sarco (15.7x) and Spectris (27.3x).

This valuation gap is the central investment debate. The market is not giving JDG credit for its long-term compounding track record or its high-margin, niche-dominant business model.

8.5 Factors Justifying a Discount

The 40-50% valuation discount is not irrational. It is the market’s attempt to price in a specific and severe cluster of risks that its peers lack:

1. Size and Liquidity: Judges (Market Cap ~£365M) is a small-cap stock. Its peers are large, established FTSE 100/250 companies with market caps 15-35x larger, warranting a significant liquidity and scale discount.
2. CEO Succession Risk: This is the most significant factor. The extreme “key-man risk” of a 76-year-old founder CEO ⁴⁵ with no named successor is a discount factor that cannot be overstated.
3. New Earnings Volatility: The pivot to the “lumpy” Geotek services model ¹⁷ has made earnings less predictable than its peers. The market pays a high premium for predictability, which Judges has partially sacrificed.
4. Deteriorating M&A Returns: The sharp decline in ROTIC from 22.7% to 16.5% ⁵ provides quantitative evidence that the M&A engine’s efficiency is declining as it scales, justifying a lower multiple.

A sum-of-the-parts analysis is not applicable as the company provides segment-level reporting but does not break out the financials for its 25 individual subsidiaries.

9. Management Quality & Track Record

9.1 Background and Experience of Key Executives

The management team is highly experienced and has been the driving force behind the Group’s success.

• David Cicurel (Chief Executive): Aged 76, he founded Judges in 2002.⁴⁴ His career as a turnaround specialist and “active value” investor shaped the Group’s M&A-centric philosophy.³⁶ He is the company’s largest shareholder (9.2%).⁴⁰
• Brad Ormsby (Chief Financial Officer): Has been CFO for 10 years, providing financial continuity.³⁶
• Ralph Elman (Non-Executive Chair): Appointed January 1, 2025. He was promoted from a Non-Executive Director role to replace the retiring Hon. Alexander Hambro, a founding director.⁴⁸ This move signals a strong desire for cultural continuity at the Board level.

9.2 Long-Term Track Record of Value Creation

Management’s track record is objectively “market-beating”.⁶⁴ The Group has been scaled from a £2 million initial investment in 2003 to a peak market capitalization of over £580 million.⁴⁸ This was achieved by delivering an 18-year total revenue CAGR of 21% and a dividend CAGR of 23%.¹² This represents an outstanding long-term record of value creation.

9.3 Communication Quality and Transparency

Communication with investors is direct, transparent, and avoids hyperbole. The 2024 and H1 2025 reports are prime examples. Management did not hide the poor performance, candidly calling 2024 “difficult” ¹⁴ and H1 2025 a “mixed picture” ⁴ and “disappointing”.¹⁴ They were clear in identifying the causes of weakness, specifically the “reduced profitability in the wider Organic group” ⁴ and the “reductions in US federal government research funding”.⁴ This transparency builds investor trust.

9.4 Strategic Vision and Execution Capability

The strategic vision—the “buy-and-build” model—has been clear and consistent for two decades.⁵ The execution of this vision has been historically flawless. The 2024 earnings miss ³⁴ and subsequent ROTIC decline ⁵ represent the first major challenge to this record, stemming directly from the strategic pivot to acquire larger, more complex businesses like Geotek.

10. Investment Thesis Synthesis

10.1 Key Bull Case Arguments

• Proven Compounding Model: The company possesses a 20-year, battle-tested “buy-and-build” model that has delivered a 21% revenue CAGR and 23% dividend CAGR.¹²
• Significant Valuation Discount: The stock trades at a 40-50% EV/EBITDA discount to its high-quality UK compounder peers (Halma, Diploma), suggesting that its significant risks are more than priced in.
• Resilient Cash Generation & Dividend: Cash conversion was 122% in the “difficult” 2024 year.⁵ Management’s confidence in the underlying model was just demonstrated by a 10% dividend hike in H1 2025, reaffirming its shareholder-friendly policy.⁴
• Exceptional Insider Alignment: The founder/CEO owns 9.2% of the company ⁴⁰, and other directors have been significant net buyers in 2025 ⁴¹, ensuring management’s interests are aligned with shareholders.
• M&A Engine Reloaded: With leverage at a low 1.5x and a new £140 million credit facility, the Group has significant “firepower” to reignite M&A-led growth.²

10.2 Key Bear Case Arguments or Concerns

• Extreme CEO Succession Risk: This is the single largest risk. The 76-year-old founder/CEO is the architect of the entire strategy.⁴⁴ There is no clear succession plan, and his long-tenured leadership team is also retiring.⁴ This “key-man risk” creates a massive, unquantifiable overhang.⁴⁷
• New Earnings Volatility: The 2022 Geotek acquisition has fundamentally changed the business model, introducing “lumpy,” unpredictable project revenue.¹⁷ This new volatility was the direct cause of the 2024 earnings miss and the “mixed” H1 2025 results.⁴
• Deteriorating M&A Quality: The sharp drop in ROTIC from 22.7% (2023) to 16.5% (2024) ⁵ is hard evidence that the strategic pivot to larger, more expensive acquisitions is, so far, generating lower returns and challenging the scalability of the model.
• Persistent Core Weakness: The “wider Organic group” (ex-Geotek) was weak in H1 2025 ⁴, driven by a direct, ongoing macro headwind from US federal research funding cuts.⁴

10.3 Critical Factors to Monitor Going Forward

1. CEO Succession: Any announcement regarding a transition plan, retirement, or the grooming of an internal/external successor for David Cicurel.
2. Geotek Contracts: Management commentary on the timing and certainty of the next major coring expedition, which is a key variable for 2026 earnings.⁴
3. ROTIC Trajectory: The full-year 2025 and H1 2026 TTM ROTIC figures. A stabilization and recovery back toward 20% would be a strong bull signal; a further decline would validate the bear case.
4. Core Organic Growth: Commentary on the performance of the “wider Organic group” ⁴ and the status of the US market. A return to positive organic growth (ex-Geotek) is necessary to prove the 2024-2025 weakness was cyclical, not structural.
5. M&A Execution: The size, strategic rationale, and—most importantly—the multiple paid for the next acquisition. A return to the 3-7x EBIT range would be a positive signal of continued discipline.

10.4 Sustainability of Competitive Position and Growth Model

The competitive position of the 25 underlying subsidiaries is highly sustainable, protected by deep niche moats.³ The sustainability of the growth model itself is the central question. It is threatened by two key factors: the “key-man risk” at the top ⁴⁷ and the “scalability vs. returns” trade-off evident in the declining ROTIC.⁵

10.5 What Could Cause the Investment Thesis to Break?

• The Bull Thesis Breaks If: The CEO succession is fumbled, leading to a strategic void or a new team that abandons the disciplined model. It also breaks if the core “Organic group” continues to decline, proving the weakness is permanent, or if the Geotek business model proves too volatile for the market to value.
• The Bear Thesis Breaks If: A clear, credible, and culturally-aligned CEO succession plan is announced. It also breaks if ROTIC sustainably recovers above 20% and the core organic business returns to its 5-8% growth trajectory, proving the 2024-2025 period was an anomaly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Earnings and Business Cycle

• Are earnings at a cyclical high or cyclical low? Earnings appear to be at a cyclical low. Fiscal year 2024 was explicitly described as a “difficult trading year” , with adjusted profit before tax falling 23%. This weakness continued into the first half of 2025, which, despite headline growth from a delayed project, showed “reduced profitability in the wider Organic group”. This downturn is linked to external cyclical factors, specifically “reductions in US federal government research funding” and, in 2024, significant weakness in China.
• Are earnings driven primarily by the external environment (commodity producer), or internal company actions? The company’s long-term growth has been driven by internal company actions, specifically its disciplined “buy-and-build” M&A strategy. However, the recent poor performance in 2024 and 2025 was driven almost entirely by the external environment. Management attributes this to factors outside its control, including “reductions in US federal government research funding” , “difficult market conditions in the USA” , and (in 2024) “general weakness in order intake, particularly in China”.
• How stable are revenues? How much do they fluctuate with the economy? Revenues are not correlated with the general industrial economy. Instead, they are highly sensitive to the funding cycles of their core customers: universities, research facilities, and government agencies. The recent downturn, for example, was caused directly by cuts to “US federal government research funding”. Furthermore, the 2022 acquisition of Geotek has made Group revenues less stable and more “lumpy”. The 2024 revenue decline was largely caused by the delay of a single large Geotek project , and the H1 2025 revenue increase was driven by the recognition of that same project.

Business Model and Competitive Landscape

• Can this business be easily understood? The high-level strategy is straightforward: it is a “buy-and-build” holding company that acquires and holds niche scientific instrument businesses. However, the 25 underlying businesses are highly technical. The business has recently become less easy to understand, as the 2022 acquisition of Geotek introduced a “lumpy” service revenue component (coring expeditions) that makes earnings less predictable. The company is “buying bigger, pricier and more complex businesses” as it grows.
• Can this company be undermined by foreign, low-cost labor? This is unlikely. The company competes on technology, brand reputation, and niche dominance, not on cost. Its subsidiaries are protected by “narrow moats” built on intellectual property, high customer switching costs, and deep technical expertise. The industry is driven by “technological advancements” and significant R&D investment (Judges spends ~6% of sales on R&D ), which are high barriers to entry for low-cost competitors.
• Do brands matter in the business? Or is this a commodity producer? Brands are critical. The company is the opposite of a commodity producer. Its entire acquisition strategy is centered on buying businesses that have “established reputations in world-wide niche markets”. Subsidiaries like Fire Testing Technology (FTT) and Quorum Technologies are described as “world’s leading” and “market-leading,” respectively. This brand strength is a key source of its competitive advantage.
• What is the nature of competition? Do brand names matter? What are the customers switching costs? As stated above, brand names are paramount. The company’s subsidiaries operate as dominant players in fragmented global niches. Competition comes from other small, highly specialized firms. Customer switching costs are high; the instruments are highly specialized, mission-critical components for research, and customers (like universities and labs) build their workflows and experimental methods around them.
• How profitable is this industry? Are there a lot of competitors? What are the barriers to entry? The scientific instruments industry is structurally profitable, characterized by “long term growth fundamentals and resilient margins”. The market is highly fragmented, with many small, private companies serving specific niches. While Judges’ subsidiaries compete with these smaller specialists, the overall industry includes multi-billion dollar giants like Thermo Fisher, Agilent, and Danaher. Barriers to entry are high, consisting of the high cost of R&D and advanced technology , deep intellectual property, and high customer switching costs.
• Outlook for the company’s products and services? How big will this market be? Is it growing? Shrinking? Domestic or international? The long-term outlook for the scientific instruments market is strong. It is a large, international market; Judges exports over 85% of its revenue. Market-wide growth is projected at a CAGR of 6-7% , driven by rising global R&D spending and technological advancements in biotechnology and precision medicine. However, the immediate outlook for Judges’ products is “challenging” due to specific headwinds from “reductions in US federal government research funding”.

Financial Health & Accounting

• How conservative is the company’s accounting? Are they over- or under- stating earnings? The company’s accounting appears conservative. Like most serial acquirers, management reports “Adjusted” earnings, which exclude large, non-cash expenses—primarily the amortization of intangible assets acquired during takeovers. This means statutory net income is significantly lower than the adjusted, economic earnings of the business. For example, in H1 2025, statutory pre-tax profit was £6.6 million, while adjusted pre-tax profit was £12.6 million. This is a standard and transparent practice that arguably understates statutory earnings relative to the company’s cash-generating ability.
• Has the company recently changed accounting policies? There is no indication of any recent, fundamental changes to the Group’s accounting policies. The H1 2024 interim report noted that comparative 2023 figures were “restated for adjustment to the measurement of the fair value of the contingent consideration recognised in the Geotek acquisition”. This is a routine adjustment of an acquisition-related estimate, not a change in core accounting principles.
• Is net income diverging from cash from operations? No, cash flow is a key strength. Cash from operations consistently tracks or exceeds net income. Cash conversion is a key performance indicator for the Group and was an impressive 122% in 2024 and 86% in H1 2025. This demonstrates high earnings quality.
• How much free cash flow does the business generate? How does management use this free cash flow? What is their philosophy? Free cash flow generation is a core strength. In FY 2024, the company generated £34.0 million from operations. Management’s philosophy for using this cash is explicit and disciplined: the top priorities are to reduce debt from past acquisitions and then reinvest the remaining cash into new, earnings-enhancing acquisitions. Remaining cash is used to fund the company’s progressive dividend.
• How CapEx hungry is this business? What % of cash from operations must be spent on CapEx to sustain the business? The business is not capital-intensive; one of its core investment case pillars is “low capital use”. To sustain the business (excluding acquisitions), the company spends on non-acquisition Capex and capitalized development costs. In the full fiscal years 2024 and 2023, this sustaining investment was approximately 18-19% of cash generated from operations.
• How profitable is this business? What is the return on capital invested? Return on equity? The business is historically highly profitable. The 10-year average Return on Equity (ROE) is 19.1%. Following the 2024 downturn, the TTM ROE is currently 12.26%. Management’s key performance metric is Return on Total Invested Capital (ROTIC). This metric has declined recently, falling from 22.7% in 2023 to 16.5% in 2024. As of H1 2025, the TTM ROTIC was 17.9%.
• Does the company have assets that are not fully recognized in the balance sheet? Yes. The company’s most valuable assets are intangible and not fully reflected on the balance sheet. These include the “established reputations” , brand names, and market-leading positions of its 25 autonomous subsidiaries.
• What off B/S liabilities does the company have? The primary contingent liabilities relate to its acquisition strategy. The Group often uses “contingent consideration,” or earn-outs, to buy businesses. This means it is liable to pay additional cash to the sellers of acquired companies (e.g., Rockwash) in the future, but only if those businesses achieve pre-agreed profit targets.

Shareholder & Management

• Is the company buying back shares? Paying dividends?The company is a consistent dividend payer. It is a core part of their shareholder return policy to increase the dividend by a “minimum of 10% per year”. They reaffirmed this by raising the H1 2025 interim dividend by 10% despite the difficult trading environment. The company does not engage in significant share buybacks.
• Does the company issue large amounts of new shares to insiders? No. While the company has a Share Incentive Plan (SIP) , there is no evidence of large-scale share issuance to insiders. The total number of shares outstanding has grown very slowly (e.g., 1.85% in 2024 ), indicating that dilution from compensation is not a significant factor.
• How many options / shares is the management issuing to insiders? Is it more than 10% of net income? The company issues shares via an incentive plan and options , but the overall dilution is very low. The total number of shares outstanding grew by only 1.85% in 2024 and 2.7% in 2023. Given this extremely low dilution, it is highly unlikely that share-based compensation exceeds 10% of net income.
• What are the motivations of management? Do they own a lot of stock and options? Management’s motivations appear to be exceptionally high and aligned with shareholders. As of September 2025, founder and CEO David Cicurel (age 76) is the company’s largest shareholder, owning 9.2% of the issued share capital (611,375 shares). Other directors are also owners and have been actively purchasing shares in 2025, including a £101,192 purchase by a Non-Executive Director in October 2025 and regular purchases by all executive directors.
• What is the compensation policy of directors and management? The compensation policy appears conservative. CEO David Cicurel’s total compensation for 2024 was £284,000, which is noted as being “below average for companies of similar size”. The compensation structure includes salary, bonuses, and incentives. The company also encourages broad employee ownership through a Share Incentive Plan, where it matches employee share investments up to £900 per year.
• Is the stock and ADR? What are the ADR fees? Is the stock an MLP? Is there a K1 issued to investors?The primary listing is Judges Scientific Plc (JDG) on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange. It is a UK-incorporated Public Limited Company. It is not an MLP and does not issue a K1. There is an unsponsored foreign ordinary share listing in the US under the ticker JSCIF.

Recent Events & Risk Factors

• Has the business environment changed recently? Yes, significantly. Management describes the H1 2025 period as a “challenging trading environment” , primarily due to “difficult market conditions in the USA”. This is directly attributed to “reductions in US federal government research funding” , a key source of revenue for the company’s customers.
• Has the company made any significant acquisitions recently? The most significant recent acquisition was Geotek in May 2022, the largest in the Group’s history. More recently, during 2024, the company completed three smaller acquisitions: Luciol Instruments SA, Rockwash Geodata Ltd, and Teer Coatings Ltd. No acquisitions were made in the first half of 2025.
• Recent changes in the business, new markets, new production facilities, what’s changed recently? New management? Yes, there have been significant recent changes.
  • Board & Management: Founding Chairman Alex Hambro retired in May 2025 and was replaced by internal promotion Ralph Elman. The COO, Mark Lavelle, announced his intention to retire by September 2026. The company formed a new Executive Committee and hired a new Group Acquisitions Executive in July 2025.
  • Acquisitions: Three new businesses were acquired in 2024 (Teer Coatings, Rockwash Geodata, and Luciol Instruments).
  • Market Environment: The company is facing significant headwinds from “difficult market conditions in the USA” due to cuts in federal research funding.
• What are the recent news on the company? The most significant recent news is the H1 2025 interim results (released September 18, 2025). These results were a “mixed picture” : while headline revenue grew 15% , this was driven by a large Geotek coring project. This masked “reduced profitability in the wider Organic group” , which is suffering from “difficult market conditions in the USA”. Despite this, the company raised its interim dividend by 10%. Other recent news includes the appointment of a new Non-Executive Chair and recent insider share purchases by directors.
• What factors would cause the stock to decline? Are these factors controlled by the company or the external environment? The stock has already declined significantly. Factors that could cause a further decline are a mix of external and internal:
  • External: A continuation of the “difficult market conditions in the USA” or a deepening of the “reductions in US federal government research funding”.
  • Internal: The most significant internal risk is a poorly managed CEO succession, as the 76-year-old founder is central to the strategy. Other internal risks include the failure to integrate the “lumpy” Geotek business , a further decline in the ROTIC metric , or the loss of key technical personnel at the subsidiary level.
• What is the risk of a catastrophic loss on this investment? What is the chance of a total loss? The risk of a total loss appears very low. The Group is profitable (even in the recent downturn) , highly cash-generative (122% cash conversion in 2024) , and maintains a strong balance sheet. Gearing (leverage) is conservative at 1.5x Adjusted EBITDA, well below its 3.0x bank covenant. The business is also well diversified across 25 autonomous subsidiaries , two segments , and global geographies.

Works cited

1. Judges Scientific (JDG) Interim results presentation – September 2024 – YouTube, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yHxn8EpZ50
2. JDG investor presentation – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00215/240919-JDG-Half-Year-Results-Presentation-.pdf
3. JUDGES SCIENTIFIC PLC JDG Our story – London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/JDG/judges-scientific-plc/our-story
4. Interim Results – 07:00:05 17 Sep 2025 – JDG News article | London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/JDG/interim-results/17236527
5. Judges Scientific plc Annual report and accounts 2024, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00075/Judges-Scientific-plc-Annual-report-and-accounts-2024.pdf
6. About Us – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/utility/about-us.html
7. Judges Scientific Faces Headwinds in US Market During H1 2025, accessed November 11, 2025, https://uk.advfn.com/market-news/article/2540/judges-scientific-faces-headwinds-in-us-market-during-h1-2025
8. INTERIM REPORT 30 JUNE 2024 – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00075/Judges-Scientific-Group-interim-stats-2024-Website-version.pdf
9. Judges Scientific plc – Public now, accessed November 11, 2025, https://docs.publicnow.com/B211EE5A57105C955800EA836127D320EF457B05
10. Judges Scientific Full Year 2024 Earnings: Beats Expectations – Simply Wall St News, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/capital-goods/aim-jdg/judges-scientific-shares/news/judges-scientific-full-year-2024-earnings-beats-expectations
11. Our Businesses – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://judges.uk.com/our-businesses.html
12. ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS 2023 – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00128/Judges_AR23.pdf
13. Annual Report and Accounts 2022, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReportArchive/j/LSE_JDG_2022.pdf
14. Financial Reports – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://judges.uk.com/financial-performance/reports.html
15. Judges Scientific plc Interim Report 30 June 2024, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00075/Judges-Scientific-Group-interim-stats-2024-vf.pdf
16. Judges Scientific, Geotek, & GDS Instruments | JDG – InPractise, accessed November 11, 2025, https://inpractise.com/articles/judges-scientific-geotek-and-gds-instruments
17. JDG V SDI: The Battle of Buy and Build – ShareScope Articles, accessed November 11, 2025, https://knowledge.sharescope.co.uk/2022/05/25/jdg-v-sdi-the-battle-of-buy-and-build/
18. JDG investor presentation – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, http://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00215/250319-JDG-Full-Year-Results-Presentation-final.pdf
19. Life Science & Analytical Instruments Market Trends 2025 Spectroscopy Leads, APAC Booms – Towards Healthcare, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.towardshealthcare.com/insights/life-science-and-analytical-instruments-market-sizing
20. Analytical Instrumentation Market Report | Industry Analysis, Size & Growth Trends, 2030 – Mordor Intelligence, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/analytical-instrumentation-market
21. Scientific Instruments Market Report 2025 – Research and Markets, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5782782/scientific-instruments-market-report
22. Analytical Instrumentation Market Size & Report Analysis, 2028 – KBV Research, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.kbvresearch.com/analytical-instrumentation-market/
23. Scientific Instruments Market – IndustryARC, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.industryarc.com/Research/scientific-instruments-market-research-800079
24. Halma PLC Investment Analysis, https://drive.google.com/open?id=1bX4XSJZOEqx5mcG42iJB49aZLFkFwNDySkoHKy9xqRA
25. Diploma PLC Investment Analysis Request, https://drive.google.com/open?id=17qx-QrhPqe3byMjmarR5NeNsH_2V5odRBzMq9BHr-tA
26. SpiraxSarco Engineering PLC: Analysis , https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pTIvO-tvZ-e1LiF5adM01Q-McY–QUqGkNaNBa0asYY
27. Scientific Instruments Market Size, Share, and Demand Growth Forecast Report, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.skyquestt.com/report/scientific-instruments-market
28. U.S. Analytical Instrumentation Market Size Report, 2033 – Grand View Research, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/us-analytical-instrumentation-market-report
29. Judges Scientific PLC (JDG:LN) – London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://api.londonstockexchange.com/api/gw/lse/download/JUJDG/tearsheet
30. Judges Scientific plc (JDG.L) – Revenue – Companies Market Cap, accessed November 11, 2025, https://companiesmarketcap.com/gbp/judges-scientific-plc/revenue/
31. Judges Scientific plc – ROE – Wisesheets, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.wisesheets.io/roe/JDG.L
32. Are Judges Scientific plc’s (LON:JDG) Fundamentals Good Enough to Warrant Buying Given The Stock’s Recent Weakness?, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/capital-goods/aim-jdg/judges-scientific-shares/news/are-judges-scientific-plcs-lonjdg-fundamentals-good-enough-t
33. Investor Dialogue: Judges Scientific | JDG – InPractise, accessed November 11, 2025, https://inpractise.com/articles/investor-dialogue-judges-scientific
34. Analyst Research | Judges Scientific, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/analystresearch.html
35. Judges Scientific Reports 15% Revenue Growth and 10% Dividend Increase Amid Market Challenges | Joshua Thompson, accessed November 11, 2025, https://joshthompson.co.uk/investing/judges-scientific-reports-15-revenue-growth-10-dividend-increase-market-challenges/
36. Judges Scientific plc Annual report and accounts 2024 Financial Statements, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00075/Judges-Scientific-plc—Statutory-Accounts-2024—vf—signed-(002).pdf
37. Judges Scientific plc (JSCIF) H1 2025 Earnings Call Transcript | Seeking Alpha, accessed November 11, 2025, https://seekingalpha.com/article/4824137-judges-scientific-plc-jscif-h1-2025-earnings-call-transcript
38. JUDGES SCIENTIFIC PLC JDG Analysis – London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/JDG/judges-scientific-plc/analysis
39. Purchase of Ordinary Shares, 13 May 2025 17:18 | RNS News | JDG – JUDGES SCIENTIFIC PLC, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.investormeetcompany.com/companies/judges-scientific-plc/rns/4148410/view
40. Shareholder Information – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://judges.uk.com/financial-performance/disclosures.html
41. IN BRIEF: Judges Scientific director buys PS100,000 in shares | AJ Bell, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.ajbell.co.uk/news/articles/brief-judges-scientific-director-buys-ps100000-shares
42. Director/PDMR Shareholding, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/rns/judges-scientific–jdg/director-pdmr-shareholding/9226633
43. Director deals – Judges Scientific plc (JDG) – Hargreaves Lansdown, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/j/judges-scientific-plc-ord-gbp0.05/director-deals
44. Judges Scientific plc (IUF) Leadership & Management Team Analysis – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/de/capital-goods/fra-iuf/judges-scientific-shares/management
45. Team – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://judges.uk.com/main/management-team.html
46. Entrepreneur Series – Interview with David Cicurel – Bluebox Corporate Finance, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.blueboxcfg.com/blog/entrepreneur-series-interview-david-cicurel/
47. Judges Scientific (JDG) – Buyside Digest, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.buysidedigest.com/elevator/judges-scientific-jdg/
48. Board Change – 07:00:09 19 Dec 2024 – JDG News article | London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/JDG/board-change/16821234
49. JUDGES SCIENTIFIC PLC JDG Stock | London Stock Exchange, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/JDG/judges-scientific-plc/company-page
50. Judges Scientific PLC, JDG:LSE summary – FT.com – Markets data, accessed November 11, 2025, https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/summary?s=JDG:LSE
51. Judges Scientific (LON:JDG) Statistics & Valuation Metrics – Stock Analysis, accessed November 11, 2025, https://stockanalysis.com/quote/lon/JDG/statistics/
52. Judges Scientific (AIM:JDG) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/capital-goods/aim-jdg/judges-scientific-shares/valuation
53. Judges Stock Price Today | LON: JDG Live – Investing.com, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.investing.com/equities/judges-scientific-plc
54. Judges Scientific plc (JDG.L) – Market capitalization – Companies Market Cap, accessed November 11, 2025, https://companiesmarketcap.com/judges-scientific-plc/marketcap/
55. Halma (LSE:HLMA) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/tech/lse-hlma/halma-shares/valuation
56. Diploma (LSE:DPLM) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/capital-goods/lse-dplm/diploma-shares/valuation
57. Spirax Group (LSE:SPX) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/capital-goods/lse-spx/spirax-group-shares/valuation
58. Halma (LON:HLMA) Statistics & Valuation Metrics – Stock Analysis, accessed November 11, 2025, https://stockanalysis.com/quote/lon/HLMA/statistics/
59. Diploma (OTCPK:DPLM.F) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/capital-goods/otc-dplm.f/diploma/valuation
60. Spirax-Sarco Engineering PLC Stock Price Today | LON: SPX Live – Investing.com, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.investing.com/equities/spirax
61. Spectris (LSE:SXS) Stock Valuation, Peer Comparison & Price Targets – Simply Wall St, accessed November 11, 2025, https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/tech/lse-sxs/spectris-shares/valuation
62. Corporate Governance Statement – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.judges.uk.com/__assets__/WebPages/00245/Corporate-Governance-Statement—Web.pdf
63. EXECUTIVE CHANGES: Judges Scientific chair, founding director retires | AJ Bell, accessed November 11, 2025, https://www.ajbell.co.uk/news/articles/executive-changes-judges-scientific-chair-founding-director-retires
64. Corporate Governance – Judges Scientific plc, accessed November 11, 2025, https://judges.uk.com/financial-performance/corporate-governance.html