HII
Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-03Overview · Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.
Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. engages in designing, building, overhauling, and repairing military ships in the United States. It operates through three segments: Ingalls, Newport News, and Mission Technologies. The company is involved in the design and construction of non-nuclear ships comprising amphibious assault ships; expeditionary warfare ships; surface combatants; and national security cutters for the U.S…
Management team
- Ms. Brooke A. Hart · Executive Vice President of CommunicationsFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Paul Clinton Harris Sr. · Executive VP and Chief Sustainability & Compliance OfficerFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Edgar Andy Green III · Executive VP & President of Mission TechnologiesFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Chad N. Boudreaux J.D. · Executive VP & Chief Legal OfficerFind 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.
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.
The evidence balance is Mixed (+0.4 of a possible +2; confidence high) and the packet documents quarter-to-quarter improvement in profitability alongside notable cash-flow weakness. Revenues rose from $ 3,099,000,000 in FISCAL Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-05-01) to $ 3,418,000,000 in FISCAL Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-07-24), a quarter-over-quarter increase of about 10.2%, while operating income increased from $ 155,000,000 to $ 210,000,000 and calculated operating margin expanded from about 5.00% to about 6.15% over the same pair of quarters. Net income rose from $ 149,000,000 to $ 208,000,000 and diluted EPS from $ 3.79 to $ 5.27; shares outstanding have been essentially stable at roughly 39.4 million and long-term noncurrent debt was essentially unchanged at about $ 2,702,000,000 between 2026-03-31 and 2026-06-30.
At the same time, trailing twelve‑month free cash flow is negative $ -1,255,000,000 and net cash from operating activities is negative $ -996,000,000, while TTM operating income was $ 689,000,000 and TTM EBITDA was $ 1,007,000,000. Market metrics in the packet include a P/E of 17.39 (based on diluted EPS $ 16.60 TTM and price $ 288.72 as of 2026-09-02) and an EV/EBITDA of 14.17; media coverage is company-specific and mixed, with earnings-focused headlines, valuation pieces, bearish takepieces citing a prior six‑month share drop, and documented institutional flow changes.
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 increased from $3,099,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $3,418,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), a quarter-over-quarter rise of about 10.2%.
XBRL companyfacts · 0001501585-26-000029Operating income rose from $155,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $210,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001501585-26-000029Reads 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.
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 2026-09-02, the security is listed with a 0.02% weight in the ETF with symbol IVV.
ETF constituents · market dataThe provided ownership evidence contains a single ETF membership record and does not list weights in any other ETFs.
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.
Coverage includes company-specific earnings focus: a headline on 29 August 2026 highlights stronger-than-anticipated Q2 2026 revenue and EPS and cites a $57.3 billion order backlog.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-08-29Several outlets published valuation and analyst-themed pieces in late August 2026, including a Yahoo Finance article that discusses analyst outlook and another Yahoo piece that presents a discounted cash flow / intrinsic value view.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-08-21Reads 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 company reported negative free cash flow for the trailing twelve months of -$1,255,000,000 and negative net cash from operating activities of -$996,000,000 (ttm).
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeTrailing twelve months operating income was $689,000,000 and EBITDA was $1,007,000,000 (ttm).
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 presented claims collectively show a near-term operational improvement: quarter-over-quarter revenue grew ~10.2% while operating income and margins expanded and diluted EPS rose materially from Q1 to Q2 2026. Trailing twelve‑month operating income and EBITDA are positive, and the reported TTM EPS produces a mid‑teens P/E (17.39) that coexists with those earnings metrics. News items cite a $57.3 billion order backlog and analyst/valuation discussion, which reinforces that company‑specific fundamentals and valuation narratives are driving coverage rather than only market‑wide forces. The bear points about negative free cash flow and recent stock weakness deserve attention, but those items rest on cash/FCF snapshots and price action that can be affected by timing of receipts, working capital and one‑off items; in contrast, the quarter-to-quarter operating and earnings expansion and solid EBITDA provide stronger, more directly observable evidence of improving operating performance in the reported period.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.34
21 surviving claims rest on 11 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 33% of them, and 98% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read is supported by a moderate breadth of source types (filings, valuation models, news, ownership) but the surviving claims concentrate on a relatively small set of documents and one analyst carries a third of the desk's codified points. The very high debate survival rate implies few effective counterarguments were raised, so treat the bundle as informative but somewhat fragile: source concentration and analyst dependence reduce how much weight these claims should bear absent fresh, independent corroboration.
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.
14 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+0.7 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.
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 HII 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.