MMM
3M COEvidence as of 2026-09-03Overview · 3M CO
3M Company provides diversified technology services in the United States and internationally. The company operates through four segments: Safety and Industrial; Transportation and Electronics; Health Care; and Consumer. The Safety and Industrial segment offers industrial abrasives and finishing for metalworking applications; autobody repair solutions; closure systems for personal hygiene products, masking, and packag…
Management team
- Ms. Wendy A. Bauer · Group President of Transportation & Electronics Business GroupFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Christian T. Goralski Jr. · Group President of Safety & IndustrialFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Michael F. Roman · Executive AdvisorFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Theresa E. Reinseth · Senior VP, Corporate Controller & Chief Accounting 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.
+0.8 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.
What the evidence shows
The desk rates the evidence balance as Constructive (+0.8 of a possible +2; was +0.8 before debate) with confidence high. Revenues rose from $6,030,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-03-31) to $6,500,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-06-30), a quarter‑over‑quarter increase of $470,000,000 and a year‑over‑year Q2 gain of $156,000,000 versus $6,344,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-06-30). Gross margin narrowed versus the year‑ago quarter (≈ 41.3% in fiscal Q2 2026 versus ≈ 42.5% in fiscal Q2 2025) while operating income fell to $984,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 from $1,397,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $1,140,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2025. Net income in fiscal Q2 2026 was $933,000,000, above the year‑ago quarter by $210,000,000, and diluted shares outstanding declined to 522,400,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 from 532,800,000 in fiscal Q1 2026, with point‑in‑time common shares down to 515,722,417 as of 2026-06-30.
What the debate changed
Analysts disagreed mostly over capital return and the durability of margin pressure; the desk retained its Constructive score and did not materially change the overall read. One claim about active repurchases reported at $1,274,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 was weakened in the debate, which reduced the weight of buyback evidence but did not alter the surviving observations about lower diluted shares outstanding. Otherwise the key revenue, margin, income, balance‑sheet and valuation claims held through the review.
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 were $6,030,000,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-03-31, 3mo) and $6,500,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo), an increase of $470,000,000 quarter-over-quarter.
XBRL companyfacts · 0000066740-26-000175Revenue in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30, 3mo) was $6,500,000,000 versus $6,344,000,000 in fiscal Q2 2025 (2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30, 3mo), an increase of $156,000,000 year-over-year for that quarter.
XBRL companyfacts · 0000066740-26-000246Reads 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 2026-09-02T13:45:47.228469+00:00, the security is a constituent of the IVV ETF with a reported weight of 0.13% of that fund.
ETF constituents · market dataThe reported 0.13% weight indicates a relatively small position within that large-cap index-tracking fund on the timestamped membership file.
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 a positive-sounding piece focused on the company's safety and industrial segment, framed as presenting potential upside in the headline.
News · zacks.com · 2026-09-01One headline ties company-specific portfolio execution updates to broader industrial conditions as the reason the stock is 'getting attention.'
News · kalkinemedia.com · 2026-08-31Reads 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 model reports an implied free cash flow (FCF) growth rate of 0.4362 (43.62%) that today's price would justify under the stated discount and terminal assumptions.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeTrailing twelve‑month free cash flow (FCF) is $1,226,000,000 and FCF per share is $2.3469, with the price on 2026-09-02 at $168.75 producing a price‑to‑FCF ratio of 71.9.
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 items together support a constructive read: sequential and year-over-year revenue gains (fundamentals-0, fundamentals-1) coincided with materially higher reported net income in Q2 2026 versus the year-ago quarter (fundamentals-4). The company is actively shrinking share count via buybacks (fundamentals-5, fundamentals-6), which magnifies per-share earnings and cash-return metrics; institutional filings also show incremental stake increases (news-2, news-3), consistent with outside investors adding exposure. Balance-sheet items show modest reduction in long-term noncurrent debt (fundamentals-7) and an EV/EBITDA multiple in the mid-teens (valuation-2), which can be read as valuation support relative to comparable industrials. These points jointly counter headline concerns about a single-quarter operating income dip by highlighting revenue and net-income strength, share-count reduction, and institutional accumulation as reinforcing signals.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.38
21 surviving claims rest on 10 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 38% of them, and 98% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read rests on a relatively small set of distinct sources and a few dominant contributors, so many surviving claims are correlated rather than fully independent. High analyst concentration and the fact that almost everything raised survived debate mean the desk’s conclusions carry coherence but limited redundancy — treat the bundle as informative but fragile to a small number of source updates or a single analyst’s revision.
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.
11 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+0.6 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+1.0 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.
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.
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 MMM 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.