SNA
Snap-on IncorporatedEvidence as of 2026-10-08The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on SNA
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 · Snap-on Incorporated
Snap-on Incorporated manufactures and markets tools, equipment, diagnostics, and repair information and systems solutions for professional users worldwide. It operates through Commercial & Industrial Group, Snap-on Tools Group, Repair Systems & Information Group, and Financial Services segments. The company provides hand tools, including wrenches, sockets, ratchet wrenches, pliers, screwdrivers, punches and chisels,…
Management team
- Mr. Bradley R. Lewis · Executive Vice President of Business Operations, Technology, Repair Systems & Information GroupFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Timothy L. Chambers · Senior VP & President of Snap-on Tools GroupFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Thomas J. Ward · Senior VP and President of Repair Systems & Information GroupFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Anup R. Banerjee · Senior VP of Human Resources & Chief Development OfficerFind 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.
−0.2 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 desk grades the evidence balance as Mixed ( -0.2 of a possible +2 ) with high confidence. Revenues show a modest sequential rise from $ 1,291,900,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-10-10) to $ 1,308,300,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-04-17) and $ 1,334,800,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-07-17). Operating income fell from $ 347,400,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 to $ 318,800,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 then partially recovered to $ 336,400,000 in fiscal Q2 2026, while net income moved from $ 265,400,000 to $ 247,000,000 and $ 260,600,000 across those same three-month periods.
Diluted EPS was reported at $ 4.69 in fiscal Q1 2026 and $ 4.96 in fiscal Q2 2026, and the company reduced common shares outstanding across reporting dates with $ 99,900,000 of repurchases noted in fiscal Q1 2026. Liquidity and leverage measurements show cash and cash equivalents around $ 1,644,700,000 as of fiscal Q2 2026 against long-term debt near $ 1,204,000,000, implying a simple cash-minus-debt net-cash position; market metrics show low short-term realized volatility, muted beta ( 0.56 ), mixed momentum (three-month momentum -10.0%, 12_1 +17.9%), and a trailing P/E of 18.56.
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 $1,291,900,000 in fiscal Q3 2025 (2025-06-29 to 2025-09-27, 3mo) to $1,308,300,000 in fiscal Q1 2026 (2026-01-04 to 2026-04-04, 3mo) and $1,334,800,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (2026-04-05 to 2026-07-04, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0000091440-25-000081Operating income was $347,400,000 in fiscal Q3 2025, fell to $318,800,000 in fiscal Q1 2026, then rose to $336,400,000 in fiscal Q2 2026 (each a 3-month fiscal period).
XBRL companyfacts · 0000091440-25-000081Reads 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.
The 2025 risk disclosures add a concentration risk noting that approximately 38% of consolidated net revenues in 2025 were generated by the Snap-on Tools Group, which depends on relationships with franchisees as the primary sales link to vehicle service and repair technicians.
10-K filed 2026-02-12The 2025 risk disclosures add or emphasize geographic exposure, stating that approximately 29% of revenues in 2025 were generated outside of the United States and that numerous political, economic and trade risks could affect non-U.S. operations.
10-K filed 2026-02-12Reads 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 is -10.0% and six-month momentum is -4.8%, with six-month momentum ranked in the 33th percentile of the 866-stock research universe (cross-sectional below median).
Moneyta signal set · 2026-10-07weakened in debateThe 12_1 momentum measure is +17.9%, ranked in the 58th percentile of the 866-stock research universe (slightly above median on this longer-horizon momentum metric).
Moneyta signal set · 2026-10-07weakened 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.
13F-reported institutional holders held a total reported market value of "$19.46B" in the quarter ended 2026-06-30.
13F holdings · 1069 filers · as of 2026-06-30The top reported institutional holders (13F) in the 2026-06-30 filing include BlackRock, Inc. at "$1.72B", VANGUARD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC at "$1.36B", VANGUARD PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT LLC at "$1.08B", STATE STREET CORP at "$948.3M", and FIRST TRUST ADVISORS LP at "$833.1M".
13F holdings · 1069 filers · as of 2026-06-30Reads 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 highlights the company’s focus on RCI (Rapid Continuous Improvement), innovation and related strategies as drivers of growth.
News · zacks.com · 2026-10-07Multiple articles emphasize technician tool demand and the role of the franchisee van network as central themes shaping the company’s outlook.
News · kalkinemedia.com · 2026-10-06Reads 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.
Insiders reported aggregate sales of "$31.3M" and aggregate buys of "$0" inside the 180-day window in the parsed dataset.
Form 4 · OZOLINS MARTY V. (Vice President & Controller) · $135k code M · 2026-08-26The parsed data shows zero distinct open-market officer buyers in the 180-day window ("distinct_buyers": 0), so no open-market officer buying cluster was identified.
Form 4 · OZOLINS MARTY V. (Vice President & Controller) · $135k code M · 2026-08-26Reads 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 reported trailing price/earnings (P/E) ratio is 18.56.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closeMarket capitalization is reported as 18,616,074,656 and enterprise value is reported as 18,175,374,656.
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.
Taken together, the company-level fundamentals and corporate actions in the filings provide a favorable read: sequential revenue growth across recent quarters, rising diluted EPS, a declining share count with active repurchases, and a net-cash position versus long-term debt are all documented in SEC filings and quarterly reports and strengthen the constructive interpretation. Management-reported full-year sales growth and strong operating cash flow/repurchase activity (filings) complement low realized volatility and above-median longer-horizon momentum in market signals, while institutional and ETF ownership metrics show broad professional participation — these data points are sourced to company filings, 13F disclosures and market signal feeds, which are relatively high-strength evidence. The bear points—concentration, geographic and tariff risks, recent short-term price weakness, and clustered insider sales—are valid risk disclosures and market observations (weaker as drivers of a company-specific thesis because they are standard risk-language and some insider transactions are reported as 10b5-1), but they do not negate the concrete cash-flow, EPS and buyback evidence. Evidence strength: SEC-filed financials and 13F/filings are high strength; market-signal percentile measures and dividend/volatility metrics are medium-high strength; press coverage and parsed insider-sale summaries are medium strength.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.37
45 surviving claims rest on 18 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 22% of them, and 98% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read is moderately robust: many claims (45) are supported but they come from a relatively small set of distinct sources, so common-source errors or gaps could affect multiple claims at once. The single heaviest analyst contributes a meaningful share of claims and the near-complete survival through internal debate increases confidence, but reliance on a limited source base and analyst concentration raises fragility around contested or updated items.
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.
10 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+0.5 to the score
12 documents· 3 cited
SEC filing documents
The filings themselves, including the year-over-year comparison of Item 1A risk factors.
Read by Oakes−0.1 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+0.2 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+0.8 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
5 filings· 1 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−0.7 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 SNA 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.