META
Meta Platforms, Inc.Evidence as of 2026-09-18The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on META
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 · Meta Platforms, Inc.
Meta Platforms, Inc. engages in the development of products that enable people to connect and share with friends and family through mobile devices, personal computers, virtual reality headsets, and wearables worldwide. It operates in two segments, Family of Apps and Reality Labs. The Family of Apps segment offers Facebook, which enables people to share, discuss, discover, and connect with interests; Instagram, a comm…
Management team
- Ms. Janelle Gale · Head of PeopleFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Henry T. A. Moniz · Chief Compliance OfficerFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Jennifer G. Newstead J.D. · Chief Legal OfficerFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Alexander P. Schultz · Chief Marketing Officer and VP of Product, Growth, Analytics & InternationalizationFind 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.
−0.6 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 Cautious ( -0.6 of a possible +2; confidence high). Revenue rose from $56,311,000,000 in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-03-31) to $60,801,000,000 in Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-06-30), while operating income declined from $22,872,000,000 to $18,775,000,000 over the same quarters. Net income fell from $26,773,000,000 in Q1 2026 to $15,848,000,000 in Q2 2026 and diluted EPS moved from $10.44 to $6.18; R&D expense increased from $17,699,000,000 to $21,656,000,000.
Point-in-time balances show cash and cash equivalents declining from $35,873,000,000 as of FY 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-12-31) to $23,426,000,000 as of Q1 2026 and to $15,462,000,000 as of Q2 2026, while long-term debt rose from $58,744,000,000 as of FY 2025 to $83,664,000,000 as of Q2 2026. Total assets, liabilities, and stockholders’ equity all increased across those dates, and market signals show elevated short- and medium-term realized volatility (30‑day annualized +33.6%, 90‑day +43.3%) alongside mixed momentum and a trailing P/E of 27.5 and price / FCF of 39.49.
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 was $56,311,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) and $60,801,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-028526Cost of revenue was $10,218,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) and $11,330,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-028526Reads 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.
In the Annual Report on Form 10-K filed 29 January 2026, the company states that "we have made significant investments in AI initiatives, including investments in infrastructure and headcount, including specialized technical personnel," and that it expects to continue to increase these investments.
Item 1A risk-factor diff · 0001628280-26-003942 vs 0001326801-25-000017In the 10-K filed 29 January 2026 the company states that "some of these investments, particularly our significant investments in Reality Labs, have generated only limited revenue and reduced our operating margin and profitability," and that its "ability to support these investments is dependent on generating sufficient profits from other areas of our business."
Item 1A risk-factor diff · 0001628280-26-003942 vs 0001326801-25-000017Reads 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.
Three-month momentum was +20.2% as of 2026-09-17, with six-month momentum at +10.8% (ranked 55th percentile of the 561-stock research universe).
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-17weakened in debateThe 12_1 momentum metric (12-month minus 1-month) was -30.6% as of 2026-09-17, and its cross-sectional rank was the 10th percentile of the 561-stock research universe.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-09-17weakened 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.
The aggregated 13F-reported institutional holdings value is listed as "$1018.91B" for the reporting period ended 2026-06-30, and the report shows a quarter-over-quarter value change of -79.6 percent.
13F holdings · 5077 filers · as of 2026-06-30weakened in debateThe same 13F data lists 5,077 institutional holders as of the reporting period ended 2026-06-30, with a holder_count_delta_qoq of 4,711.
13F holdings · 5077 filers · as of 2026-06-30weakened in debateReads 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.
Mark Cuban criticized how Meta and Google fund AI, calling attention to an industry-wide irony in funding models.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-09-18An article reported that Meta launched a new AI-centered subscription business and framed the move as an attempt to help pay for heavy AI spending.
News · fool.com · 2026-09-17Reads 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.
Andrew Bosworth (Chief Technology Officer) reported an open-market sale on 18 August 2026 of 7,848 shares for a reported value of "$4.4M" under a stated 10b5-1 plan.
Form 4 · Bosworth Andrew (Chief Technology Officer) · $4.4M sold · 2026-08-18Curtis J. Mahoney (Chief Legal Officer) reported a sale on 18 August 2026 of 1,559 shares for a reported value of "$870k" under a stated 10b5-1 plan.
Form 4 · Mahoney Curtis J. (Chief Legal Officer) · $870k sold · 2026-08-18Reads 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-implied free cash flow (FCF) growth rate that today's price would justify, under the stated discount and terminal assumptions, is 26.45%.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeTrailing twelve-month free cash flow (FCF) is $44,335,000,000 and price-to-FCF (price / FCF) is 39.49, which implies a trailing FCF yield of about 2.53%.
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-reported and market-signal items jointly support a favorable read: top-line revenue grew quarter-to-quarter (fundamentals-0) while the company materially increased R&D spending (fundamentals-5) and disclosed continued AI investments in its 10-K (filings-0), which together help explain near-term margin pressure. Balance-sheet expansion is evident with rising total assets and equity (fundamentals-8, fundamentals-10), and short-term market momentum and technicals are positive with price above both moving averages (market-0, market-4). Institutional footprint and ETF inclusion remain broad (ownership-1, ownership-2), and the available street consensus skews toward Buy (third-party consensus), which, when combined with positive news on AI product launches and chip plans (news-1, news-4), strengthens a constructive interpretation of the evidence. While profitability and cash metrics show stress, the contemporaneous evidence of investment-driven expense increases and asset/equity growth provides an alternative, investment-led explanation for those declines.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.37
44 surviving claims rest on 19 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 25% of them, and 96% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The surviving read is moderately robust: it draws on nearly twenty distinct sources, so it is not a one-document story, but one analyst contributes a quarter of the surviving claims which concentrates influence. Also, 96% survival through internal debate means the desk retained most points — useful for descriptive reporting but less resilient to a major contradictory source or a single analyst reversing view.
Peer context · computed, not argued
12-1 momentum ranks 5th of 6 in Internet Content & Information (as of 2026-09-17).
6-month relative strength ranks 5th of 6 in Internet Content & Information (as of 2026-09-17).
90-day volatility ranks 4th of 6 in Internet Content & Information (as of 2026-09-17).
dividend yield ranks 1st of 6 in Internet Content & Information (as of 2026-09-17).
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.
8 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−0.1 to the score
12 documents· 1 cited
SEC filing documents
The filings themselves, including the year-over-year comparison of Item 1A risk factors.
Read by Oakes−0.6 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−0.4 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+0.3 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
8 filings· 2 cited
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−0.6 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 META 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.