CF
CF Industries Holdings, Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-02Moneyta sentiment
Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it — not a rating or a recommendation.
+0.2 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 (+0.2 of a possible +2; confidence high). Revenues rose from $1,986,000,000 in fiscal quarter ended 2026-05-04 (Q1 2026) to $2,222,000,000 in fiscal quarter ended 2026-08-03 (Q2 2026), an increase of $236,000,000 (≈ 11.9%). Gross profit expanded from $746,000,000 to $1,145,000,000 over that same pair of quarters, implying gross margin moved from about 37.6% to about 51.5%. Weighted‑average diluted shares fell from 154,500,000 to 153,900,000 and reported common shares moved from 153,668,821 as of 2026-01-30 to 151,338,130 as of 2026-08-03. The valuation and cash‑flow picture shows trailing twelve‑month free cash flow of $1,952,000,000 (free cash flow per share $12.6836), implied free‑cash‑flow growth priced in of -5.46%, P/FCF (TTM) 10.69, EV/EBITDA (TTM) 5.69 and P/E (TTM) 10.22; market signals show strong recent momentum (+19.5% 3‑month, +28.1% 6‑month), a persistent golden cross, elevated realized volatility (30‑day annualized +44.0%), and a negative market sensitivity versus the S&P 500 ETF (beta_spy = -0.95).
What the debate changed
The desk left the core fundamental improvements intact — revenue, gross‑profit expansion, and the reduced share count all survived the debate — and the evidence balance remained Mixed (+0.2), as it was before. The analysts weakened the evidence around repurchases and one market momentum claim was marked weakened, but no surviving claim was dropped outright. That narrowing of confidence around buyback activity and a portion of the market narrative adjusted the texture of the case without moving the overall read.
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 rose from $1,986,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $2,222,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), an increase of $236,000,000 (≈11.9%).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001324404-26-000013Gross profit expanded from $746,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $1,145,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), implying gross margin moved from about 37.6% to about 51.5% (746/1,986 and 1,145/2,222 respectively).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001324404-26-000013Reads 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.
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.
As of 1 September 2026, CF shows strong recent momentum: 3-month momentum +19.5%, 6-month momentum +28.1%, and 12-1 momentum +30.1% with rank_momentum_6m at the 86th percentile of 547 and rank_momentum_12_1 at the 70th percentile of 547.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-01weakened in debateAs of 1 September 2026 the trend signals are positive: a golden_cross is present, price is +13.8% vs the 50-day SMA and +26.9% vs the 200-day SMA, and the cross has been in place for 131 days.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-01Reads 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, CF appears as a holding in the ETF with symbol IVV at a weight of 0.03% of that fund.
ETF constituents · market dataThe provided evidence is a single ETF membership record (etf_symbol IVV) timestamped 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00; no other ETF memberships or changes over time are shown in the evidence.
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 outlets focus on CF's Blue Point One low-carbon ammonia joint venture and its planned US$3.7 billion investment.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-09-01Coverage across several outlets frames recent share gains as being driven by stronger nitrogen demand, higher pricing and tight supply.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-09-01Reads 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.
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.
The model's implied free-cash-flow growth rate that today's price would justify is -5.46% (implied_growth = -0.0546) as of the price date 2026-09-01.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeValuation multiples from the filings show price/FCF (TTM) = 10.69, EV/EBITDA (TTM) = 5.69, and P/E (TTM) = 10.22, based on the price dated 2026-09-01 and the provided TTM metrics.
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 contemporaneous items in the evidence jointly support a favorable read. Quarter-to-quarter revenue and gross-profit expansion (fundamentals-0 and fundamentals-1) alongside a modest decline in diluted shares and reported share-count reduction (fundamentals-2) point to improving per-share economics. The balance-sheet picture shows rising total assets and equity (fundamentals-4) while trailing twelve‑month free cash flow and cash-generation metrics are sizable (valuation-2), and common valuation multiples (valuation-1) are comparatively low versus those cash-flow levels. Market signals of strong multi-horizon momentum and a sustained golden-cross (market-0 and market-1), plus industry/news coverage emphasizing a large low-carbon ammonia project and tighter nitrogen market dynamics (news-0, news-1, news-3), provide corroborating market- and narrative-level support for a favorable read.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.34
21 surviving claims rest on 10 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 24% of them, and 95% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The evidence set rests on a moderate number of distinct sources but many surviving claims (21) — this creates some informational leverage per source. One analyst (or contributor) accounting for nearly a quarter of the surviving claims and a 95% survival rate from the desk debate indicates high internal consistency but also some concentration risk: the read is reasonably robust yet not immune to source- or-analyst-specific errors.
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· 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+0.9 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−0.3 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 CF 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.