APD
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-02Moneyta sentiment
Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it — not a rating or a recommendation.
−0.1 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.
What the evidence shows
The evidence balance is Mixed ( -0.1 of a possible +2; confidence high). Revenues were $ 3,102,500,000 for fiscal Q1 2026 (ended 2025-12-31), $ 2,916,200,000 for fiscal Q2 2026 (ended 2026-03-31), and $ 3,161,000,000 for fiscal Q3 2026 (ended 2026-06-30). Operating income was positive at $ 734,500,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $ 752,700,000 in fiscal Q2 2026, then swung to an operating loss of $ 2,097,100,000 in fiscal Q3 2026; net income mirrors that pattern with $ 678,200,000 in Q1, a loss of $ 1,730,600,000 in Q2, and a loss of $ 1,440,800,000 in Q3. Market signals are mixed: low market sensitivity with beta 0.19 and correlation 0.09, a golden cross in place with price + 2.3% vs the 50‑day SMA and + 9.2% vs the 200‑day SMA (cross age 122 days), positive shorter‑term momentum (3‑month + 10.0%, 6‑month + 13.2%), but a high price-to-earnings (TTM) of 103.15 and negative trailing free cash flow of $ 2,590,200,000.
What the debate changed
The desk did not drop or weaken any surviving claim; nothing was removed in debate. The back-and-forth clarified that most items held firm — 96% of what the desk raised survived — and that the packet’s heaviest analyst contributed 29% of the surviving claims, which concentrates the evidence somewhat but did not alter the underlying read. Because no claim was weakened enough to be removed, the overall mixed evidence balance stayed essentially unchanged at -0.1.
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.
Revenues were $3,102,500,000 for fiscal Q1 2026 (2025-10-01 to 2025-12-31, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0000002969-26-000008Revenues were $2,916,200,000 for fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0000002969-26-000020Reads 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.
Beta vs SPY is 0.19 and correlation vs SPY is 0.09 as of 2026-09-01, indicating low market sensitivity and low linear co-movement with the S&P 500.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-01Shorter-term momentum signals are positive: 3-month momentum +10.0% and 6-month momentum +13.2%, with the 6-month momentum at the 67th percentile of the 547-stock research universe on 2026-09-01.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-01weakened in debateReads 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.
As of 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00, APD is a holding in the IVV exchange-traded fund with a reported weight of 0.1% of the fund.
ETF constituents · market dataThe provided evidence item reporting APD's ETF membership is timestamped 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.
Multiple 13F-driven articles report new or increased institutional stakes in Air Products, including a 81,616-share position added by the Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio in the second quarter.
News · thelincolnianonline.com · 2026-08-30Jupiter Topco LLC is reported to have acquired a new position of 46,762 shares in Air Products during the second quarter.
News · thelincolnianonline.com · 2026-08-30Reads 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.
Price-to-earnings (TTM) is 103.15 based on reported trailing EPS of 2.96 and the market price of 305.32.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeEnterprise-value-to-EBITDA (TTM) is 44.86 with reported trailing EBITDA of 1,588,900,000 and enterprise value of 71,284,946,020.
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.
Revenue series across Q1–Q3 2026 (fundamentals-0, fundamentals-1, fundamentals-2) provide consistently reported top-line strength; those SEC-sourced items are high-strength evidence of ongoing sales scale. Market-structure and sentiment signals (market-0, market-1, market-2, market-6) are medium-strength, internally consistent indicators of low market sensitivity, positive momentum/technical positioning, and a meaningful dividend yield, while multiple 13F-derived news items and ETF inclusion (news-0 through news-6, ownership-0) show institutional accumulation signals of moderate strength. The bear case leans on large Q3 operating and net losses and negative free cash flow (fundamentals-3, fundamentals-4, valuation-2, valuation-0), which are also strong evidence but can be read alongside the strong revenue base and prior positive operating quarters (fundamentals-3 lists positive operating income in Q1–Q2) to argue the company still exhibits material operating scale. Taken jointly, high-quality revenue reporting plus positive market technicals and institutional flows support a favorable informational read; the weakest bear points are those that conflate market-wide valuation multiples and short-term FCF volatility with long-term revenue scale, where the evidence strength differs between accounting outcomes (strong) and market/flow signals (moderate).
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.34
28 surviving claims rest on 14 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 29% of them, and 96% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The surviving-read set is moderately concentrated: many claims come from a limited number of sources and a single analyst contributed a large share, so individual sources or that analyst’s interpretations materially affect the bundle’s strength. Because 96% of the desk’s challenges survived debate, the claims are internally consistent, but dependence on few sources and one heavy analyst reduces how much weight this read can bear without further independent corroboration.
Peer context · computed, not argued
12-1 momentum ranks 3rd of 3 in Specialty Chemicals (as of 2026-09-01).
6-month relative strength ranks 1st of 3 in Specialty Chemicals (as of 2026-09-01).
90-day volatility ranks 3rd of 3 in Specialty Chemicals (as of 2026-09-01).
dividend yield ranks 1st of 3 in Specialty Chemicals (as of 2026-09-01).
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.
13 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−0.7 to the score
1 signal set
Moneyta signal set
Computed from our own end-of-day price history and ranked against the whole research universe. No AI involved.
Read by Nash+0.4 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 APD 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.