AOS
A. O. Smith CorporationEvidence as of 2026-09-02Moneyta sentiment
Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it — not a rating or a recommendation.
+0.0 on a −2 to +2 scale.
What builds the score
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.
Editor's note
Written after the debate settled — the rest of the page is the evidence behind it.
The evidence balance is Mixed and the surviving claims establish that revenue was $ 963,900,000 for fiscal Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-03-31) and $ 1,004,300,000 for fiscal Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-06-30), versus $ 1,011,300,000 in fiscal Q2 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-06-30) and $ 942,500,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-09-30). Gross profit was $ 375,400,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $ 387,800,000 in fiscal Q2 2026, implying gross margins near 38.9% and 38.6% for those quarters respectively, with prior-quarter gross profit of $ 397,100,000 (fiscal Q2 2025) and $ 364,500,000 (fiscal Q3 2025).
Operating income and net income both declined across the recent quarterly sequence shown: operating income was $ 184,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $ 166,100,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 versus $ 206,200,000 in fiscal Q2 2025 and $ 175,400,000 in fiscal Q3 2025; net income was $ 136,600,000 and $ 124,900,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and fiscal Q2 2026 respectively versus $ 152,200,000 in fiscal Q2 2025 and $ 132,000,000 in fiscal Q3 2025. Weighted-average diluted shares declined to 137,862,584 in fiscal Q2 2026 from 140,894,888 in fiscal Q3 2025. Trailing-twelve-month operating cash flow is $ 394,600,000, free cash flow $ 330,900,000 (or $ 2.4002 per diluted share), trailing EBITDA $ 800,100,000, trailing EPS $ 3.77, and reported period-end cash is $ 181,300,000 with long-term debt reported at $ 155,000,000 (a small net cash position as reported). Public coverage highlights roughly a 24.8% six-month share decline, operational headwinds including China softness and margin pressure, an announced China strategic review and CFO transition, and an average broker consensus of Hold from nine firms.
How this note was made
every stage ran before the note was writtenAnalyst 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.
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.
Revenue was $963,900,000 for fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) and $1,004,300,000 for fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo); comparable mid-2025 quarters were $1,011,300,000 for fiscal Q2 2025 (2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30, 3mo) and $942,500,000 for fiscal Q3 2025 (2025-07-01 to 2025-09-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0000091142-26-000084Gross profit was $375,400,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $387,800,000 in fiscal Q2 2026, implying gross margins near 38.9% (375.4/963.9) in fiscal Q1 2026 and 38.6% (387.8/1004.3) in fiscal Q2 2026; fiscal Q2 2025 and fiscal Q3 2025 gross profit were $397,100,000 and $364,500,000 respectively.
XBRL companyfacts · 0000091142-26-000084Reads 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.
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.
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.
AOS was held in ETF IVV at a weight of 0.01% of the fund as of 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00.
ETF constituents · market dataReads 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.
Several headlines highlight recent share-price weakness, noting a roughly 24.8% decline over the prior six months and investor concern about the stock.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-09-02Coverage notes operational headwinds including margin pressure, softer demand in China, a lowered residential outlook, tariff headwinds, and a announced strategic review of the China business alongside a planned CFO transition.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-08-28Reads 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.
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.
Free cash flow for the trailing twelve months is $330,900,000 and operating cash flow for the trailing twelve months is $394,600,000, with capital expenditures of $63,700,000 in the trailing twelve months (OCF minus capex equals the reported FCF).
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeFree cash flow per diluted share (trailing twelve months) is $2.4002 using the reported diluted weighted-average shares of 137,862,584.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeDebate and risk review
A bull and a bear contest the claims and the chair rules on each; the risk review stress-tests what survived.
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 evidence set supports a constructive read based on recurring cash generation, improving per-share cash metrics, and operational margin resilience. Trailing twelve-month free cash flow of $330.9M and operating cash flow of $394.6M, combined with FCF per diluted share of $2.40 and TTM EBITDA of $800.1M, constitute strong, directly reported cash-flow and profitability metrics (valuation-0, valuation-1, valuation-2). Gross margins have held near ~38.6–38.9% across the most recent quarters, which is a materially positive operational signal versus narratives of broad margin deterioration (fundamentals-1). Share count has declined over the recent sequence, mechanically supporting per-share metrics (fundamentals-4), and a subset of coverage highlights contrarian upside narratives after recent share moves (news-5). These points jointly rebut the bear case most strongly where it relies on price action or isolated quarterly softness rather than multi-quarter cash-flow and margin data.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
diversified0.29
18 surviving claims rest on 11 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 33% of them, and 100% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The surviving read rests on a moderate breadth of sources but a meaningful concentration of analyst influence: one analyst accounts for a third of surviving attributions, and the desk recorded no losses in the internal debate. That pattern raises questions about over-weighting from a few contributors and potential confirmation bias — treat the read as informative but somewhat fragile until independently corroborated.
Disconfirming evidence · base rates · falsifiers
Context
Outside consensus, and where this name already sits in your own portfolio.
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.
11 filings· 1 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+0.0 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 computation
Valuation inputs
TTM cash-flow figures from the company's own XBRL filings, priced with the stored closing price. Implied growth and multiples only; no fair-value dollar figure reaches the desk, by design.
Read by Archercontext only
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.
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 AOS Gold
Who holds it, who's buying, what the Street thinks: live behind the lock, updated as filings land.
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.