Featured researchA real report from the desk, on public data — this is what every report looks like.

AFL

Aflac IncorporatedEvidence as of 2026-09-02

Moneyta sentiment

Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it — not a rating or a recommendation.

Mixedhigh confidence
−2 · strongly unfavorable0 · balanced+2 · strongly favorable

+0.3 on a −2 to +2 scale.

What builds the score

Fundamentals
+0.5
Ownership and flow
+0.0

Solid bars are analyst rubric scores; faded bars are computed directly from data. Claims dropped in debate count for nothing; weakened claims count at half weight.

News tonecontext · not scored+0.4 observed
3 favorable2 neutral1 unfavorableacross 3 outlets

Editor's note

Written after the debate settled — the rest of the page is the evidence behind it.

GoodwinAI editor

The evidence balance is Mixed ( +0.2 of a possible +2; was +0.2 before debate) with high confidence. Reported revenues fell from $4,346,000,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2026 (fiscal Q1 2026) to $4,117,000,000 in the quarter ended 30 June 2026 (fiscal Q2 2026), a quarter-to-quarter decline of $229,000,000 (≈‑5.3%). Net income declined from $1,019,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 to $825,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026, and diluted earnings per share fell from $1.98 to $1.63 across the same two quarters.

The balance sheet composition shifted toward higher stockholders' equity and somewhat lower liabilities over the sample: equity rose from $26,338,000,000 as of 31 March 2025 to $30,312,000,000 as of 30 June 2026, while liabilities declined from $93,920,000,000 to $85,649,000,000. Weighted average diluted shares outstanding trended down across the sample (from 546,878,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2025 to 505,578,000 in the quarter ended 30 June 2026), supported by disclosed repurchase cash payments of $900,000,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2025 and $1,000,000,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2026.

How this note was made

every stage ran before the note was written
Analystsread the evidence
Debatebull ⇄ bear ×2
Chairrules on every claim
Riskstress-tests the read
Sentimentweighs what survived
Editorwrites the note

Analyst desk

Mercer, Oakes, Nash, Ellis, Yates, Talbot and Archer. The desk: named AI agents, not people. Each reads one slice of the evidence and nothing else — no outside knowledge, no browsing — so every finding traces to a source you can open.

MercerAI fundamentals analyst
+1.0

Reads the XBRL figures companies file with the SEC — revenue, margins, income, debt and share count, quarter by quarter — and reports which way the trend is running.

Reported revenues were $4,346,000,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2026 (fiscal Q1 2026) and $4,117,000,000 in the quarter ended 30 June 2026 (fiscal Q2 2026), a decrease of $229,000,000 (≈‑5.3%) quarter-to-quarter.

XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-030923

Net income declined from $1,019,000,000 in the quarter ended 31 March 2026 (fiscal Q1 2026) to $825,000,000 in the quarter ended 30 June 2026 (fiscal Q2 2026).

XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-054618
OakesAI filings and risk analyst
+0.0

Reads the filings themselves, above all the year-over-year diff of Item 1A risk factors: which risks a company added, dropped or quietly reworded since its last annual report.

Nothing in this slice of the evidence rose to a claim — a quiet read, which itself is information.

Which filings the desk reads

The desk reads the annual 10-K in full — its risk factors, and how they changed since last year. Quarterly 10-Qs and event filings (8-Ks, insider Form 4s) are listed for context but not read line by line: the 10-K is where the material risk disclosures live. A brand-new company, or one we have only just begun tracking, may have no annual report on file yet — its risk analysis fills in once that lands.

NashAI market signals analyst
no data on file

Reads the signal panel above — momentum, volatility, drawdown, relative strength and beta — and ranks each against the whole research universe rather than judging it in isolation.

No computed signal history for this symbol yet — signals need roughly 70 trading days of price history.

EllisAI ownership and flow analyst
+0.0

Reads which funds hold the name and at what weight, plus insider Form 4 filings, to show the exposure you may already carry through index funds.

AFL appears as a holding in the ETF with symbol IVV at a weight of 0.08% of that fund as of 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00.

ETF constituents · market data

The provided record lists a single ETF membership entry (IVV) for AFL with the stated weight and timestamp; no other ETF memberships are shown in the evidence.

ETF constituents · market data
YatesAI news analyst
+1.0

Reads recent headlines that are genuinely about this company, ignoring rating chatter and market-wide stories. Findings argue in the debate but never move the sentiment score.

Aflac announced a scheduled presentation by its CFO at the 2026 KBW Insurance Conference on September 10, 2026.

News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-09-02

An explanatory piece published on 2 September 2026 describes the supplemental insurance Aflac provides, noting it pays cash benefits directly to policyholders for medical and living expenses.

News · kalkinemedia.com · 2026-09-02
TalbotAI insider activity analyst
no data on file

Reads parsed Forms 3/4/5 — who bought or sold, at what size, and whether a 10b5-1 plan was involved. Flags clustered open-market officer buying; treats plan sales as routine and never counts a fund or 10%-holder as an officer.

No insider transactions on file in the trailing 180 days.

ArcherAI valuation analyst
no data on file

Reads the implied-expectations math built from the company's own filings (the growth rate today's price would justify, and the multiples beside it) and argues whether the market's bar looks high or low for this business. Never turns the math into a target.

The filings on record don't carry four quarters of both operating cash flow and capital expenditure. IFRS filers report no common capex concept, so no FCF claim is made..

Debate and risk review

A bull and a bear contest the claims and the chair rules on each; the risk review stress-tests what survived.

Debate1 round · 4 claims contested

A bull and a bear argue the analysts' claims across two rounds, then a chair rules on each one. Only what survives feeds the score — the argument is shown, not hidden, so you can judge the reasoning yourself.

The bull case

The evidence shows balance-sheet strengthening and active capital return that together support a favorable operational read. Stockholders' equity increased from $26.34B to $30.31B while liabilities fell from $93.92B to $85.65B (fundamentals-5), indicating an improving capital position over the reporting period. At the same time, weighted average diluted shares have steadily declined (546.9M → 505.6M) and the company recorded sizable share repurchase cash outflows ($900M and $1,000M in reported quarters), which explains and amplifies the effect of capital-return programs on per-share metrics (fundamentals-3, fundamentals-4). Recent market activity—analyst rating/target updates aggregated in August and a new institutional stake reported in Q2—provide additional context of renewed investor attention (news-2, news-5).

The bear case

Chair's verdict, claim by claim

Aflac announced a scheduled presentation by its CFO at the 2026 KBW Insurance Conference on September 10, 2026.Corporate event announcement (CFO presentation) is a factual scheduling notice and is supported by the source.upheld
An explanatory piece published on 2 September 2026 describes the supplemental insurance Aflac provides, noting it pays cash benefits directly to policyholders for medical and living expenses.Explanatory article describing Aflac's supplemental insurance and benefit mechanics is company-relevant and supported by the source.upheld
AFL appears as a holding in the ETF with symbol IVV at a weight of 0.08% of that fund as of 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00.ETF membership data lists AFL as a holding in IVV at the stated weight and timestamp.upheld
Risk review

Fragility · computed, not argued

diversified0.29

14 surviving claims rest on 10 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 43% of them, and 90% of what the desk raised survived the debate.

The surviving set is moderately concentrated: a small number of sources underpin many claims and one analyst thread accounts for a large share of the desk’s upheld points, so these conclusions carry limited independence. A 90% survival rate through debate means the desk largely retained its initial readings — useful for consistency but it increases the chance that shared assumptions went unchallenged.

Disconfirming evidence · base rates · falsifiers

Context

Outside consensus, and where this name already sits in your own portfolio.

The street's viewAnalyst consensus · third-party · 2026-09-02
Buy Hold Sell Target

Third-party consensus shown for context. It never enters Moneyta sentiment — when the two diverge, the debate above is where the why lives.

What this was built from

Every figure on this page traces to one of these. The desk reads only what is listed here — no outside knowledge, no browsing — and each card shows who read it and what it contributed to the score.

14 filings· 2 cited

SEC XBRL filings

Quarterly figures as filed with the SEC, read straight from EDGAR's structured data — not retyped or estimated.

Read by Mercer+0.5 to the score

1 holdings record

Fund holdings

Which funds hold this name and at what weight, plus insider Form 4 filings.

Read by Ellis+0.0 to the score

8 headlines· 2 cited

News coverage

Recent headlines about this company, rating chatter excluded and nothing published after the report date.

Read by Yatesnothing survived

1 record· 0 cited

Company profile

Sector, industry and company details.

1 record· 0 cited

Analyst consensus

Third-party consensus, shown for context only — it never enters Moneyta sentiment.

Read means we pulled and handed it to an analyst; cited means a claim on this page points at it. Reading twelve quarters to state one trend is normal — the gap is shown rather than hidden.

Social sentiment

Crowd chatter as an evidence stream.

Coming soon

Aggregated tone from public social feeds will join the desk as its own evidence stream — read by its own analyst, contested in the same debate, and shown with the same sourcing as every other claim. Until it earns that bar, nothing renders here.

RPT-2a3caff2evidence c1d3fa63502bgenerated 9/2/2026, 9:49:33 PM · 82s12 model calls View trail

Written by AI, checked against sources

The analysts, the bull–bear debate and the editor's note are AI agents reading only the evidence listed on this page. They can misread a filing or a headline, which is why every claim cites a source you can open and check yourself. The sentiment score is arithmetic over the claims that survived the debate, not a language model's opinion.

Educational analysis of published data. Moneyta does not give investment advice or make recommendations. Past patterns do not indicate future results.

Get this for the tickers you actually hold

Plus the one thing no sample can show: how each name correlates with your portfolio, and what hides inside your funds.

The full terminal on AFL Gold

Who holds it, who's buying, what the Street thinks: live behind the lock, updated as filings land.

Unlock

Institutional holders

Net institutional flow, Q/Q

Largest holder position

Insider buys, 90 days

Clustered insider value

Street target range

The real figures are for members. Educational analysis, not advice.

Educational analysis of published data. Moneyta does not give investment advice or make recommendations.