ED
Evidence as of 2026-09-02Overview · CONSOLIDATED EDISON INC
Consolidated Edison, Inc., through its subsidiaries, engages in the regulated electric, gas, and steam delivery businesses in the United States. It offers electric services to approximately 3.6 million customers in New York City and Westchester County; gas to approximately 1.1 million customers in Manhattan, the Bronx, parts of Queens, and Westchester County; and steam to approximately 1,530 customers in parts of Man…
Management team
- Mr. Kirkland B. Andrews · Executive VP & CFOFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Robert N. Hoglund · Senior Vice PresidentFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Sylvia V. Dooley · VP & Corporate SecretaryFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Matthew Ketschke · President of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.Find on LinkedIn
Start your 7-day free trial to see the full management team.
Links open LinkedIn searches, not verified profiles. Team data from our market-data vendor's company profile.
Built with a source down
A data source was unavailable when this report was built, so Yates, Talbot, Archer could not check their evidence. That absence is Moneyta's gap, not a fact about the company — read the overall tone accordingly.
Moneyta 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.
The evidence balance is Mixed ( + 0.1 of a possible + 2 ) with confidence moderate. The company reported Revenues of $ 5,095,000,000 in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-04-30) versus $ 4,798,000,000 in Q1 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-04-30), and Operating income rose to $ 1,177,000,000 from $ 1,125,000,000 year-over-year. Net income increased to $ 924,000,000 in Q1 2026 from $ 791,000,000 in Q1 2025, and diluted EPS moved to $ 2.54 from $ 2.25 over the same comparison.
The balance-sheet and market signals present counterpoints: cash and cash equivalents fell to $ 147,000,000 as of 2026-03-31 from $ 1,629,000,000 as of 2025-12-31 while long-term debt was $ 25,801,000,000 as of 2025-12-31. Market metrics show an inverse historical beta to SPY ( beta = - 0.49 ) and a golden_cross in place as of 2026-09-01 with price - 2.0% versus the 50-day SMA and + 1.2% versus the 200-day SMA.
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.
Company reported Revenues of $5,095,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) versus $4,798,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2025 (2025-01-01 to 2025-03-31, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001047862-26-000091Operating income was $1,177,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) compared with $1,125,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2025 (2025-01-01 to 2025-03-31, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001047862-26-000091Reads 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 2026-09-01 ED's beta to SPY is -0.49 and its correlation with SPY is -0.36, indicating historically inverse/low co-movement with the broad market on that date.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-01Momentum signals are mixed as of 2026-09-01: 3-month momentum is +3.8% while 6-month momentum is -3.3%, and the 12-month (12_1) momentum is +7.8%; the 6-month momentum ranks at the 30th percentile of 547 and the 12_1 momentum ranks at the 44th percentile of 547.
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 2026-09-02T01:55:23.601495+00:00 the company had a 0.38% weight in the VO ETF.
ETF constituents · market dataAs of 2026-09-02T01:55:40.515768+00:00 the company had a 0.21% weight in the VYM ETF.
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.
A data source was unavailable when this report was built, so this slice could not be checked — absence here says nothing about the company.
Reads 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.
A data source was unavailable when this report was built, so this slice could not be checked — absence here says nothing about the company.
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.
A data source was unavailable when this report was built, so this slice could not be checked — absence here says nothing about the company.
Debate 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 claim set jointly supports a favorable read because the company reported clear top-line and profitability improvements in Q1 2026: revenues, operating income, net income, and diluted EPS all rose year-over-year, indicating earnings growth that outpaced share count increases. Market signals add constructive context: a long-standing golden cross with price above the 200-day SMA and a high relative dividend yield point to positive trend and income characteristics in the market-facing data. The inverse/low correlation with SPY further suggests potential portfolio diversification benefits. While there are concerns about higher shares outstanding and a large quarter-end cash decline alongside material long-term debt, the EPS gain despite dilution and the point-in-time nature of the cash figure weaken those negative claims' evidentiary weight versus the reported operating improvements and favorable trend/dividend metrics.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.53
15 surviving claims rest on 3 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 40% of them, and 97% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read rests on a small set of sources and a single analyst carrying a large share of surviving claims, so while many claims passed internal debate, their informational weight is limited by source concentration and analyst dependence. Factual items drawn from the 10-Q (revenues, income, cash, debt, share counts) are strong for what they state, but using them to infer robustness beyond the filing increases fragility; market-signal claims depend on computed feeds and will flip if short-window prices or momentum change.
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.
15 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+0.2 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+0.0 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
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 ED 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.