WAT
WATERS CORP /DE/Evidence as of 2026-09-03Overview · WATERS CORP /DE/
Waters Corporation, a specialty measurement company, provides analytical workflow solutions in Asia, the Americas, and Europe. It operates through two segments, Waters and TA. The company designs, manufactures, sells, and services high and ultra-performance liquid chromatography, as well as mass spectrometry (MS) technology systems and support products, including chromatography columns, other consumable products, and…
Management team
- Ms. Keeley A. Aleman J.D. · Senior VP, General Counsel & Corporate SecretaryFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Robert L. Carpio III · Senior Vice President of Waters DivisionFind on LinkedIn
- Ms. Jianqing Y. Bennett · Senior Vice President of TA Instruments Division & Waters Clinical Business UnitFind on LinkedIn
- Mr. Amol Chaubal · Senior VP & CFOFind 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.
−0.3 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 ( -0.3 of a possible +2; confidence high). Revenues rose from 771,000,000 in Q2 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-08-01) to 799,887,000 in Q3 2025 (fiscal quarter ended 2025-10-31), then to 1,267,000,000 in Q1 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-05-06) and to 1,645,000,000 in Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-08-07).
Operating income and net income show a clear deterioration over the same runs: operating income moved from positive 188,000,000 in Q2 2025 and 192,114,000 in Q3 2025 to negative 47,000,000 in Q1 2026 and negative 86,000,000 in Q2 2026; net income moved from 147,111,000 and 148,923,000 in those earlier quarters to -72,000,000 and -136,000,000 in the two most recent quarters. Diluted EPS mirrors that pattern, from 2.47 and 2.50 to -0.87 and -1.39 across the same periods.
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 rose from 771,000,000 in the period Q2 2026 (2025-03-30 to 2025-06-28, 3mo) to 799,887,000 in Q3 2025 (2025-06-29 to 2025-09-27, 3mo), then increased to 1,267,000,000 in Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-04-04, 3mo) and to 1,645,000,000 in Q2 2026 (2026-04-05 to 2026-07-04, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001193125-26-344691Operating income moved from positive 188,000,000 in Q2 2026 (2025-03-30 to 2025-06-28, 3mo) and 192,114,000 in Q3 2025 (2025-06-29 to 2025-09-27, 3mo) to negative 47,000,000 in Q1 2026 (2026-01-01 to 2026-04-04, 3mo) and negative 86,000,000 in Q2 2026 (2026-04-05 to 2026-07-04, 3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001193125-26-219487Reads 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, WAT represented 0.06% of the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) by fund weight.
ETF constituents · market dataThe provided ownership evidence contains a single ETF-membership data point (IVV weight) as of 2026-09-02 and does not include other ETF holdings or 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.
Coverage includes a leadership change in Waters’s Analytical Sciences Division: a resignation of Senior Vice President Robert L. Carpio III and Tina Wu named to the role, as reported in the headline 'Is Waters (WAT) Fully Priced Following Its Leadership Change?' published 2026-09-02.
News · simplywall.st · 2026-09-02An SEC filing headline reports a new insider role for Wu Tong, indicating company-specific disclosure activity in filings, per 'Waters Corp Reports New Insider Role for Wu Tong in Official SEC Filing' published 2026-09-01.
News · kalkinemedia.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 trailing price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is 102.79 based on a trailing EPS of 4.01 for the period ending in the filings.
Valuation inputs · SEC XBRL + stored EOD closePrice-to-free-cash-flow (P/FCF) is not available in the filings because trailing free cash flow (fcf_ttm) and capex (capex_ttm) are missing from the provided data.
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 filings show clear top-line strength and operating cash-generation that support a favorable read: reported quarterly revenues rose substantially across the periods provided and trailing twelve-month net cash from operations is positive and sizable. Institutional 13F headlines clustered in late August/early September indicate multiple money managers updated positions, which, when combined with high historical EPS in the earlier quarters, suggests investor interest and previously established earnings power. The large noncash balance-sheet movements (shares outstanding and long-term debt) and the spike in valuation multiples rely on single-point disclosures or arithmetic snapshots that lack context in the provided evidence set; meanwhile cash and operating cash flow figures give direct support to liquidity and operating performance. Taken together, revenue growth, positive operating cash flow, and clustered institutional filings jointly strengthen the constructive interpretation of the evidence.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.33
20 surviving claims rest on 11 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 35% of them, and 100% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read rests on a moderate number of distinct sources but a nontrivial share of surviving claims trace back to a single analyst voice; that concentration means individual analyst judgments could meaningfully sway the narrative. Also, because everything the desk raised survived debate, there was no internal pushback — this increases the chance that overlooked assumptions or missing contrary data remain unchallenged.
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+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 WAT 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.