An analyst with a real track record

Dylan Jovine is the analyst behind the “The Arsenal” pitch, and his background is more concrete than most names in the newsletter business. He built his own broker-dealer on Wall Street by age 24, called the 2006 housing crash, and recommended Palantir near $7. Those are checkable facts, and they matter because they are the reason readers take his macro calls seriously in the first place.

His current home is Behind the Markets, where he writes a $49-a-year newsletter built around a small number of high-conviction themes. We covered his broader profile and how he frames his gold and dollar calls in our full Dylan Jovine profile, which is worth reading before you take the rearmament pitch on its own terms.

The rearmament thesis in his own framing

Jovine’s defense argument is a continuation of themes he has pushed for years. He treated the gold and dollar story as a symptom of Western fiscal strain, and the rearmament pitch extends that logic to weapons. The idea is that three years of stockpiles flowing into Ukraine and Israel have left Western militaries short, and that the rebuild will take a decade, not a year.

The specific vehicle is Elbit Systems, which he first pitched early in 2024 as “Israel’s Brand New Weapon,” leaning on the laser-weapons angle. The stock has since more than doubled, which is the source of the promo’s “up 121% since our recommendation” claim. That figure is real, but it is measured from his entry point near $200 a share, not from the roughly $783 the stock trades at today. We separate those two numbers in our teardown of the Arsenal promo.

What he got right

The core of the call has aged well. The order backlog has swollen past $30 billion for the first time in the company’s history, a fact StockGumshoe confirmed. The demand picture he described, NATO members converging on the 2% of GDP spending guideline with several European governments already beyond it, is also accurate. And his emphasis on combat-proven systems as a procurement advantage holds up: buyers prefer weapons that have worked under fire.

The earnings trajectory moved with him. Early in 2024, analysts expected roughly $7 a share by 2026. Today the consensus sits near $17 a share for 2026 and about $18 the following year, with revenue growth around 10% after that. A thesis that started as a laser-weapons story became a much broader bet on artillery, shells, and the Western munitions rebuild.

Where the call stands today

The honest read is that Jovine found a real company early and the market has since caught up. The stock near $800 trades at roughly 44 times next-year earnings for about 10% growth, which is a demanding price even for a contractor with a record backlog. A $30 billion backlog against a market cap north of $35 billion is a strong foundation, but it is not a discount.

That does not take anything away from the original call. It means the person who reads the promo today is in a different position than the analyst who made the call in early 2024. For a closer look at the newsletter itself, including what the $49 subscription actually delivers, our Behind the Markets review covers it.

The style behind the calls

Jovine’s approach leans on a handful of big, clearly stated macro themes rather than a long list of small positions. The gold and dollar work, the 2006 housing call, and now the rearmament pitch all share the same shape: identify a force early, attach a specific vehicle to it, and hold the conviction through the noise. That style rewards him when the thesis is right and concentrates risk when it is not, because there is no diversification cushion to fall back on.

The rearmament call is a clean example of how the style plays out. He first pitched Elbit in early 2024 as “Israel’s Brand New Weapon,” leaning on the laser-weapons story. The stock more than doubled from there, and the earnings estimates followed, climbing from about $7 a share by 2026 to near $17 today. A single well-timed theme did more work than a diversified basket would have, which is the whole appeal of his method.

The tradeoff is that the same concentration cuts both ways. A reader who follows the analyst today is signing up for that concentration at a much higher entry price, near $783 a share instead of near $200. The thesis may still be right, but the margin for error is thinner now. A concentrated bet that works is a home run; a concentrated bet at a stretched valuation needs everything to go right, and that is a different risk profile than the one the analyst faced two years ago.

Ready to see the research? Click here to access Dylan Jovine’s report.

NewsletterVetter is an independent publication. We receive compensation from some of the services we review through affiliate links. Nothing on this site is investment advice. Always do your own research.