HLT
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-03Overview · Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc., a hospitality company, engages in managing, franchising, owning, and leasing hotels and resorts. It operates through two segments, Management and Franchise, and Ownership. The company engages in the hotel management and licensing of its brands. It operates luxury hotels under the Waldorf Astoria Hotels & Resorts, LXR Hotels & Resorts, and Conrad Hotels & Resorts brand; lifestyle hotels…
Management team
- Ms. Caroline D. Krass · Executive VP, General Counsel & SecretaryFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Christopher W. Silcock · President of Global Brands and Commercial ServicesFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Laura Fuentes · Executive VP & Chief HR OfficerFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Kevin J. Jacobs · CFO & President of Global DevelopmentFind 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.
Mixed (+0.4 of a possible +2; was +0.4 before debate) · confidence high. The surviving financials show quarter‑over‑quarter improvement: revenue rose from $ 2,937,000,000 in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-04-23) to $ 3,341,000,000 in Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-07-23), a gain of $ 404,000,000 (about 13.8%). Operating income increased from $ 678,000,000 to $ 858,000,000 and net income moved from $ 385,000,000 to $ 482,000,000; diluted EPS rose from 1.66 to 2.10 over the same comparison.
Balance‑sheet and market evidence is mixed. Weighted‑average diluted shares outstanding edged down from 232,000,000 to 229,000,000 and the company reported $ 821,000,000 of repurchases in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-04-23), yet stockholders’ equity became more negative, shifting from negative $ 5,905,000,000 as of 2026-03-31 to negative $ 6,303,000,000 as of 2026-06-30. Valuation metrics are elevated: P/E (TTM) 42.21, EV/EBITDA (TTM) 21.07, trailing price‑to‑FCF 43.03 with implied FCF growth of 28.79% to support the observed price of 311.51.
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 increased from $2,937,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $3,341,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), a quarter-over-quarter rise of $404,000,000 (about 13.8%).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001585689-26-000032Operating income rose from $678,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) to $858,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), an increase of $180,000,000.
XBRL companyfacts · 0001585689-26-000043Reads 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, Hilton is a constituent of the IVV ETF at a weight of 0.12% of that fund.
ETF constituents · market dataThe provided ownership evidence contains a single ETF membership record and does not include any insider Form 4 filing events.
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.
An article reports that Railway Pension Investments Ltd raised its stake in Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. by 140.1% during the second quarter, holding 92,200 shares after adding 53,800 shares.
News · thelincolnianonline.com · 2026-09-01Coverage flagged unusual equity options activity around Hilton Worldwide Holdings, citing a Sept. 18, 2026 US$130 put among high implied-volatility contracts and noting the stock was trading near US$316.28 on the day of the article.
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 valuation model shows the price of 311.51 implies a free cash flow (FCF) growth rate of 28.79% (0.2879) under the stated discount and terminal assumptions.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeTrailing twelve‑month price-to-FCF is 43.03, based on FCF TTM of 1,658,000,000 and the stated 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.
The company’s most recent SEC-filed quarterly figures show consistent, material quarter-over-quarter improvements across top-line and profitability metrics: revenue (+13.8%), operating income (+$180M), net income (+$97M) and diluted EPS (+$0.44) alongside a modest reduction in diluted shares outstanding. The filings also document sizeable share repurchases, which coincide with the decline in reported common shares outstanding and support the EPS improvement as an earnings-per-share accretion effect. These pieces of evidence are direct, primary-source financial disclosures and therefore carry high evidentiary weight for interpreting recent operational and capital-allocation outcomes. The negative-stockholders’-equity and elevated trailing multiples flagged in other claims merit scrutiny because (a) the negative-equity claim is a single balance-sheet snapshot that can reflect accounting composition rather than an operational cash shortfall, and (b) valuation ratios reported rely on trailing-period numerators that do not reflect the quarter-to-quarter earnings acceleration and share-reduction dynamics evident in the filings.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.37
21 surviving claims rest on 10 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 33% of them, and 95% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The evidence base is moderately concentrated: 21 surviving claims draw on only 10 distinct sources and one analyst contributed a third of the surviving claims, which raises dependence risk on a few inputs. The very high survival rate through debate suggests the desk found the claims generally defensible, but source concentration and gaps (for example a missing reported debt figure) mean these reads should be given cautious weight rather than treated as fully definitive.
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· 2 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
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 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 HLT 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.