ATO
ATMOS ENERGY CORPEvidence as of 2026-10-02The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on ATO
Seven analysts, the debate, the risk review, every claim cited. And the same for every name you hold.
Free plan, no credit card required. Silver opens the full report, $19.99 a month. AI-written · every claim cites a source · Insight, not advice.
Overview · ATMOS ENERGY CORP
Atmos Energy Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, engages in the regulated natural gas distribution, and pipeline and storage businesses in the United States. It operates through two segments, Distribution, and Pipeline and Storage. The Distribution segment is involved in the regulated natural gas distribution and related sales operations in eight states. This segment distributes natural gas to approximately…
Management team
- Ms. Liz C. Beauchamp · Vice President of Governmental & Public AffairsFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Jessica Bateman Pulliam · Senior Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate SecretaryFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Daniel M. Meziere CPA · VP of Investor Relations & TreasurerFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Michelle H. Faulk · VP, Controller & Principal Accounting OfficerFind on LinkedIn
Start free to see the full management team.
Links open LinkedIn searches, not verified profiles. Team data from our market-data vendor's company profile.
Moneyta sentiment
Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it, not a rating or a recommendation.
−0.5 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 Cautious ( -0.5 of a possible +2; was -0.5 before the debate) with high confidence. Reported revenues were $ 1,342,585,000 for the fiscal quarter ended 2025-12-31, $ 1,962,402,000 for the fiscal quarter ended 2026-03-31, and $ 879,059,000 for the fiscal quarter ended 2026-06-30. Operating income for those same periods was $ 514,764,000, $ 764,804,000, and $ 320,414,000, yielding operating margins of roughly 38.3%, 39.0%, and 36.5%, respectively. Trailing twelve‑month metrics show negative free cash flow of $ -2,719,272,000, a P/E of 18.4 on trailing EPS of 8.5, and an EV/EBITDA near 11.6; point‑in‑time cash was $ 520,953,000 as of 2026-06-30 and reported shares outstanding rose to 168,988,553 as of 2026-07-31.
What the debate changed
Nothing material was dropped or weakened in the debate; 100% of the desk’s claims survived and the read did not shift. The analysts argued risks around regulatory exposure, capital spending execution, and liquidity — all of which remain in the filings and thus continue to factor into the cautious evidence balance.
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.
Reported revenues were $1,342,585,000 for the fiscal quarter 2025-10-01 to 2025-12-31, $1,962,402,000 for the fiscal quarter 2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, and $879,059,000 for the fiscal quarter 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30.
XBRL companyfacts · 0000731802-26-000013Operating income was $514,764,000 for the fiscal quarter 2025-10-01 to 2025-12-31, $764,804,000 for the fiscal quarter 2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, and $320,414,000 for the fiscal quarter 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30.
XBRL companyfacts · 0000731802-26-000013Reads 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.
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.
The 10-K filed 14 November 2025 added language that "interpretation by FERC or additional regulations issued by FERC in the future could also adversely affect our business, financial condition, or financial results."
10-K filed 2025-11-14The 10-K filed 14 November 2025 added a risk statement noting increasing federal, state, and local oversight of safety and stating management believes safety-related costs are "ultimately recoverable through our rates," while acknowledging the costs could be material (text truncated in the evidence).
10-K filed 2025-11-14Reads 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.
Institutional holders reported a combined holding value of $27.17B as of 2026-06-30 (13F filings carry a 45-day reporting lag).
13F holdings · 1045 filers · as of 2026-06-30The top five institutional holders reported were BlackRock, Inc. ($2.62B), STATE STREET CORP ($1.96B), VANGUARD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC ($1.88B), VANGUARD PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT LLC ($1.61B), and WELLINGTON MANAGEMENT GROUP LLP ($1.58B) as of 2026-06-30.
13F holdings · 1045 filers · as of 2026-06-30Reads 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.
A 1 October 2026 article discusses Atmos Energy in the context of its regulated natural-gas distribution business and investor assessment of catalysts and execution risks.
News · kalkinemedia.com · 2026-10-01A 1 October 2026 piece frames the stock as 'priced at a premium to dividends', raising valuation questions about the share price versus dividend stream.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-10-01Reads 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.
ROBBINS J MATT (SR VP, HUMAN RESOURCES) reported a code G transaction for 1,500 shares on 2026-09-15 with reported value "$0".
Form 4 · ROBBINS J MATT (SR VP, HUMAN RESOURCES) · $0 code G · 2026-09-15The filing shows no trading plan flag for this transaction (trading_plan: null).
Form 4 · ROBBINS J MATT (SR VP, HUMAN RESOURCES) · $0 code G · 2026-09-15Reads 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.
Trailing twelve-month free cash flow (FCF) was negative -2,719,272,000, calculated from net cash provided by operating activities 1,024,260,000 minus capital expenditures 3,743,532,000.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closePrice-to-earnings (P/E) ratio on trailing twelve-month EPS 8.5 is 18.4.
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.
Several claims jointly support a constructive interpretation of the company’s near-term performance. Quarterly operating margins above ~36% (fundamentals-2) and robust quarterly operating income (fundamentals-1) are strong, directly sourced financial metrics that indicate profitable core operations; these are supported by rising diluted EPS in the first half of 2026 relative to late 2025 (fundamentals-3), which is also a clear accounting outcome. Institutional ownership value and increasing holder count (ownership-0, ownership-2) are strong, contemporaneous signals of institutional interest. Valuation multiples show mixed signals: an EV/EBITDA of 11.6 and a P/E of 18.4 (valuation-2, valuation-1) are objective, readily verifiable ratios that can be read as reasonable relative anchors given positive EBITDA, even as free cash flow is currently negative (valuation-0) — that negative FCF is a factual flag but does not negate the strength of operating profitability or institutional support. Several bear points rely on weaker or stale inputs (see contested_claims) while the primary operational and ownership figures are strong and well-sourced.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.35
31 surviving claims rest on 13 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 19% of them, and 100% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The surviving read is built from a moderate number of distinct sources, so it has some cross‑verification rather than relying on a single document. No single analyst dominates the set, which reduces single‑voice risk, but the fact that everything the desk raised survived the debate suggests limited internal challenge — that pattern increases fragility because weak or correlated signals may have been retained rather than weeded out.
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.
12 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−0.2 to the score
7 documents· 3 cited
SEC filing documents
The filings themselves, including the year-over-year comparison of Item 1A risk factors.
Read by Oakes−0.8 to the score
3 holdings records· 1 cited
Fund holdings
Which funds hold this name and at what weight, plus insider Form 4 filings.
Read by Ellis+0.4 to the score
6 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 filing
Insider filings
Parsed Forms 3/4/5 from EDGAR: named insiders, share counts, prices, and 10b5-1 plan state, with stated and inferred flags kept apart.
Read by Talbot−0.3 to the score
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.
The full terminal on ATO 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.
Get this for the names you actually hold
Every name in your portfolio, researched the same way, plus the one thing no sample can show: how each one sits inside what you already own.
Educational analysis of published data. Moneyta does not give investment advice or make recommendations.