CHD
Church & Dwight Co., Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-29The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on CHD
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 · Church & Dwight Co., Inc.
Church & Dwight Co., Inc. develops, manufactures, and markets household, personal care, and specialty products. It operates in three segments: Consumer Domestic, Consumer International, and Specialty Products Division. The company offers cat litters, carpet deodorizers, laundry detergents, and baking soda, as well as other baking soda based products under the ARM & HAMMER brand; condoms, lubricants, and vibrators und…
Management team
- Mr. Kevin Gokey · Senior VP & Global Chief Information OfficerFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Barry A. Bruno · Executive VP, CMO & President of Consumer DomesticFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Patrick D. de Maynadier Esq., J.D. · Executive VP, General Counsel & SecretaryFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Carlos G. Linares · Executive VP, CTO & Global New Product InnovationFind 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 (was +0.3 before the debate changed the read).
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 (+0.4 of a possible +2; was +0.3 before debate) with high confidence. Revenue for the fiscal quarter ended 30 June 2026 was reported at $ 1,530,000,000, up $ 23,700,000 from the comparable prior-year quarter; diluted EPS for that same quarter was $ 0.85, above $ 0.78 a year earlier but below the immediate prior quarter’s $ 0.91. Gross profit of $ 693,900,000 and operating income of $ 276,400,000 in the quarter sit above the year‑ago comparables while cash and cash equivalents fell from $ 409,000,000 as of 31 December 2025 to $ 254,800,000 as of 30 June 2026, and reported common shares outstanding declined from 243,608,695 to 237,203,907 over the July 2025–July 2026 window. For clarity on labeling, the packet’s reporting glossary names Q2 2026 as the fiscal quarter ended 2026-07-29.
What the debate changed
Analysts debated valuation, insider activity parsing, and the interpretation of cash‑flow drivers; the net result left the surviving claims largely intact and nudged the evidence balance slightly from + 0.3 to + 0.4. No surviving claim was dropped during the debate, but the disputed and partially unparsed September 2026 Form 4 filings and the absence of reconciled post‑June 2026 filings were noted and weakened confidence in the insider‑activity picture and short‑term cash trajectory. That pushback tightened the desk’s read on the reliability of recent insider signals and on any near‑term updates to cash and share counts.
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 for the fiscal quarter ended 30 June 2026 (fiscal Q2 2026, 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30) was $1,530,000,000, up $23,700,000 from the comparable fiscal quarter ended 30 June 2025 (fiscal Q2 2026, 2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30) which was $1,506,300,000.
XBRL companyfacts · 0001193125-26-327567Operating income was $276,400,000 in the fiscal quarter ended 30 June 2026 (fiscal Q2 2026, 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30), down from $291,000,000 in the fiscal quarter ended 31 March 2026 (fiscal Q1 2026, 2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31) but above $261,700,000 in the comparable prior-year quarter (fiscal Q2 2026, 2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001193125-26-327567Reads 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.
A Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 31 December 2025 was filed on 12 February 2026 under the 10-K filed 12 February 2026.
10-K filed 2026-02-12A Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 31 December 2024 was filed on 13 February 2025 under the 10-K filed 13 February 2025.
10-K filed 2025-02-13Reads 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.
13F-reported institutional holdings total $20.92B as of 2026-06-30, with 1,069 institutional holders recorded in that quarter.
13F holdings · 1069 filers · as of 2026-06-30The largest reported institutional holders in the 13F data (as of 2026-06-30) include BlackRock, Inc. at $2.17B, VANGUARD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC at $1.50B, and STATE STREET CORP at $1.36B.
13F holdings · 1069 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 simplywall.st headline framed Church & Dwight as roughly 9% undervalued and called out e-commerce momentum alongside concerns about margin pressure.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-09-24A finance.yahoo.com headline said Church & Dwight was back in focus after recent share price swings and referenced the company’s operating and valuation metrics driving attention.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-09-23Reads 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.
Magazine Mark J (EVP Chief Commercial Officer) acquired 76 shares on 2026-09-01 with a reported transaction value of "$8k" and action listed as "code F"; the filing shows no trading-plan flag (trading_plan: null).
Form 4 · Magazine Mark J (EVP Chief Commercial Officer) · $8k code F · 2026-09-01The provided summary shows aggregate insider activity in the 180-day window as "sold": "$0", "bought": "$0", "net_shares": "0", and "distinct_buyers": 0; no cluster (>=2 distinct natural-person insiders buying >=$100k open-market inside 14 days, excluding 10b5-1) was reported in the evidence.
Form 4 · Magazine Mark J (EVP Chief Commercial Officer) · $8k code F · 2026-09-01weakened in debateReads 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 finds the price (95.62 on 2026-09-28) implies a free cash flow growth rate of 18.56% (0.1856).
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeTrailing twelve‑month free cash flow was $776,900,000 and free cash flow per share was $3.2615, producing a price-to-FCF multiple of 29.32 at the quoted price.
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 company-specific fundamentals point toward a favorable read: quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year revenue and gross-profit improvements (fundamentals-0, fundamentals-2) alongside EPS and operating-income that are above the prior-year quarter (fundamentals-1, fundamentals-3) indicate operating scale and margin resilience. Reported reduction in common shares outstanding (fundamentals-4) together with strong trailing free cash flow and institutional ownership concentrations (valuation-1, ownership-0, ownership-1) bolster the view that capital returns and investor confidence may be present. These claims jointly undercut bear narratives that rely primarily on headline valuation ratios or isolated sell ratings by showing the company is generating meaningful cash flow and that major institutional investors hold sizeable positions. While valuation multiples appear elevated on their face, the available evidence shows substantial FCF generation and share-count reduction, which strengthen the bullish interpretation of the fundamental data.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
diversified0.25
28 surviving claims rest on 18 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 21% of them, and 98% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The reading is moderately robust: surviving claims draw on a relatively small set of official filings and public data (so several claims share the same primary sources), the largest analyst contribution is material but not dominant, and the very high survival rate in debate indicates the desk’s checks produced little dissent. Taken together, these features mean the read carries nontrivial evidentiary weight for factual items (reported filings, reported financials) but is somewhat fragile to new primary-source updates or to concentrated-source errors and may reflect low internal skepticism.
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.
10 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+0.3 to the score
9 documents· 2 cited
SEC filing documents
The filings themselves, including the year-over-year comparison of Item 1A risk factors.
Read by Oakes+0.0 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+0.5 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+0.7 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 CHD 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.