BKR
Baker Hughes CoEvidence as of 2026-10-02The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on BKR
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 · Baker Hughes Co
Baker Hughes Company provides a portfolio of technologies and services to energy and industrial value chain worldwide. It operates through two segments: Oilfield Services & Equipment (OFSE) and Industrial & Energy Technology (IET). The OFSE segment designs and manufactures products and provides related services, including exploration, appraisal, development, production, rejuvenation, and decommissioning for onshore a…
Management team
- Mr. Ganesh Ramaswamy · Executive Vice President of Industrial & Energy TechnologyFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Chris Barkey · Chief Technology Officer of Industrial & Energy TechnologyFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. James E. Apostolides · Senior Vice President of Enterprise Operational ExcellenceFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Georgia Magno · Chief Legal 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.
−0.4 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 surviving record is mixed and scores at -0.4 on the desk band, with high confidence in the underlying documents. Revenue ranged from $ 7,010,000,000 in Q3 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-10-16) to $ 6,587,000,000 in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-04-16) and $ 6,742,000,000 in Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-07-23), while net income moved quarter-to-quarter at $ 609,000,000, $ 930,000,000 and $ 681,000,000 in those same periods. Reported stockholders’ equity rose from $ 15,574,000,000 as of 2024-06-30 to $ 19,908,000,000 as of 2026-06-30, shares outstanding declined from 993,423,677 as of 2024-07-17 to 985,879,124 as of 2025-07-16 then rose to 992,674,071 as of 2026-07-23, and institutional 13F holdings totaled $ 52.30B across 1,157 holders as of the 2026-06-30 reporting period. Valuation and cash-flow metrics in the packet show price-to-free-cash-flow of 38.15, free cash flow TTM $ 1,175,000,000 (FCF per share $ 1.4578), EV/EBITDA 11.3 with EBITDA TTM $ 4,392,000,000, trailing twelve‑month EPS negative at -$ 0.77, and an implied FCF growth rate of 25.51% under the stated discount and terminal assumptions; market capitalization is recorded at $ 55,212,531,829 with enterprise value $ 49,608,531,829.
What the debate changed
The analyst desk left all 28 surviving claims intact; nothing was dropped in the debate, so the read did not soften due to deleted evidence. The primary points of contention during the discussion were parsed inconsistencies in repurchase entries and partially skipped insider filing parses; those arguments weakened confidence in particular transaction lines but did not alter the fundamental revenue, equity, ownership or valuation claims that underpin the 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.
Revenue (RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax) was $7,010,000,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 (2025-07-01 to 2025-09-30, 3mo), $6,587,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo), and $6,742,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001701605-25-000117Net income (NetIncomeLoss) showed quarter-to-quarter variability: $609,000,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 (2025-07-01 to 2025-09-30, 3mo), $930,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo), and $681,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001701605-26-000014Reads 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 Form 10-K filed 5 February 2026 (fiscal 2025 year) added risk-language stating that a potential slowdown or regionally variable pace of the energy transition "could adversely affect the demand for our clean energy technologies and services" and that a mismatch between strategic positioning and market conditions "could materially impact our financial performance and access to capital."
10-K filed 2026-02-05The Form 10-K filed 5 February 2026 discloses that on July 28, 2025 the company entered into a merger agreement with Chart and adds specific risks about the proposed transaction, including "the expected timing and likelihood of completion," the need for governmental and regulatory clearance, and that conditions imposed by regulators could affect completion.
10-K filed 2026-02-05Reads 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.
As of the 13F reporting period ended 2026-06-30, reported institutional holdings total $52.30B across 1,157 holders, with a quarter-over-quarter reported value change of 5.9%.
13F holdings · 1157 filers · as of 2026-06-30BlackRock, Inc. is the largest reported 13F holder in that period with a reported position value of $5.50B; other large reported holders include JPMORGAN CHASE & CO ($3.94B), VANGUARD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC ($3.60B), STATE STREET CORP ($3.58B), and VANGUARD PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT LLC ($2.72B).
13F holdings · 1157 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.
An amended Form 8-K was submitted that includes Chart Industries financials post-acquisition.
News · kalkinemedia.com · 2026-10-01Multiple KalkineMedia headlines frame Baker Hughes as a focal point in energy sector discussions on 29–1 Oct 2026, highlighting sector themes and company operations.
News · kalkinemedia.com · 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.
Gatti Amerino (EVP, Oilfield Services & Equip) is shown on a filing dated 2026-09-03 with an entry listed as action "code M" for 9,807 shares, value "$0" (implying a per-share price of $0.00 as reported in that line).
Form 4 · Gatti Amerino (EVP, Oilfield Services & Equip) · $0 code M · 2026-09-03weakened in debateGatti Amerino (EVP, Oilfield Services & Equip) is shown on a filing dated 2026-09-03 with an entry listed as action "code F" for 3,860 shares, value "$246k" (implying a reported per-share price of approximately $63.73 on that line).
Form 4 · Gatti Amerino (EVP, Oilfield Services & Equip) · $0 code M · 2026-09-03Reads 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.
Under the stated discount and terminal assumptions, today's price implies an FCF growth rate of 25.51% (implied_growth = 0.2551).
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeThe company's price-to-free-cash-flow (price_to_fcf) is 38.15, and free cash flow for the trailing twelve months is $1,175,000,000.
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 set of fundamentals and ownership claims together provide materially positive signals: reported stockholders' equity has increased across the balance dates (fundamentals-4), revenues remained in the mid-$6.5–7.0B quarterly range (fundamentals-0), and reported quarterly net income figures are positive despite quarter-to-quarter variability (fundamentals-1). Institutional ownership is large and increased quarter-over-quarter with major asset managers holding sizable positions (ownership-0, ownership-1), and BKR appears in multiple large ETFs (ownership-3), which is corroborated by multiple recent news items about corporate activity and financing of the Chart acquisition (news-0, news-2). Valuation metrics include a mid-teens EV/EBITDA multiple (valuation-2) that, together with rising equity and positive operating income, is evidence of operating scale; the negative aspects flagged in filings and repurchase reporting are either rewordings of previously disclosed risk language (filings-3, filings-4) or inconsistent line-item reporting (fundamentals-3) that appears to be a parsing/period-labeling issue rather than clear evidence of cash outflow problems. Evidence strength: balance-sheet and revenue series are strong (direct reported figures), ownership and ETF holdings are strong (13F and ETF membership data), valuation metrics are medium-strength (derived ratios), while the repurchase inconsistency and some risk-language items are weaker evidence for company deterioration because they rely on filing wording changes and a mislabeled repurchase line.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.30
28 surviving claims rest on 15 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 18% of them, and 95% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The desk's read rests on a moderate breadth of sources but a relatively small number of analysts supply a noticeable share of the assertions, so individual analyst errors could shift the balance. High survival through debate indicates the surviving claims are internally consistent and stable in this review, but source concentration and analyst dependence limit how heavily to weight any single new data point.
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.
18 filings· 3 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+0.1 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−0.6 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+0.6 to the score
7 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+0.0 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 BKR 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.