Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
American Express Company
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Signals align: quality at a discount to the sector
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
Data: SEC EDGAR filings · prices Marketstack · estimates Finnhub · updated 11 Jul 2026, 02:30 UTC
4 of 5 met · composite in line with peers
Business quality, valuation against the sector, and position in the 52-week range — whether they line up or not.
Mixed signals
2 signals unavailable
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
1/3
Efficiency
0/2
Profitability is the clearest strength here: ROE of 34.0% runs +127% above the sector median of 15.0%, and FCF yield of 6.0% sits +28% above the median 4.7%, with FCF growing 18.0% year over year. The F-Score of 4/9 out of 4 tells a more mixed story — the efficiency sub-scores are weak, and Debt/EBITDA of 3.1× exceeds the sector median of 1.1× by +186%, placing the balance sheet in the bottom quartile of the sector. Valuation is not stretched by every measure: P/B of 7.2× is +174% above the sector median of 2.6×, yet the P/E of 21.9× sits +31% relative to the sector median of 16.7×, which is consistent with the "quality at a discount" read the composite of 47/100 out of 100 reflects. On the forward axis, the consensus divergence is mixed — realized SEC-filed growth has been strong, so the market's models are not obviously running ahead of the track record, though the beat rate over eight quarters has been uneven.
| Ticker | Name | F-Score | ROE | Revenue YoY | Op. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXP | American Express Company | 4/9 | 34% | +6% |
Quarter-by-quarter classification · a retrospective read by the current logic · not a price forecast
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. The method did not see these quarters in real time; this is the current logic applied to past reports.
The market prices in earnings growth; analyst sentiment is steady; has mostly beaten consensus.
Price against next year's expected earnings. The forward P/E already carries analyst optimism — read it alongside the “Versus consensus” line.
A forward P/E below the current one means the market expects earnings to grow; above it, to fall. The historical growth is realized figures from SEC filings, not a forecast.
The three-month change in the share of positive analyst ratings. This is sentiment, not an earnings-estimate revision, and not a call to act.
When AXP reports on July 24, track revenue year over year and whether FCF yield holds near its current 4.65%. Also check whether the F-Score profitability block (currently 3/4) gains or loses a point — net income direction and operating cash flow are the two figures to watch most closely.
AXP carries a Debt/EBITDA of 2.9×, well above the sector median of 1.07×. In the 10-K on SEC EDGAR, go to the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of the MD&A to understand how management frames refinancing risk and funding costs relative to that leverage level.
From the same-sector table in section 06, pick two or three companies yourself and line up one metric — P/B or Debt/EBITDA works well given AXP's P/B of 2.63× and leverage ratio. The table is alphabetical with no ranking, so the comparison is yours to draw.
Steps you can check yourself, based on the figures in this brief.
Piotroski F-Score: nine binary tests of financial strength from the annual report. A ✓ marks a test passed, a dot (·) a test failed.
Over 4 years: +47%-12%-29%+32%
Over 4 years: 2.022.583.543.06
Over 4 years: +23%+9%+4%+6%
The context on the right shows how each figure compares with the sector median. The trend below tracks the change over recent fiscal years.
Beat consensus in 7 of 8 recent quarters — the company clears estimates regularly (consensus is often set conservatively).
Last quarter's EPS against consensus, plus the estimated date of the next report.
| — |
| BAC | Bank of America | 5/9 | 10% | +7% | — |
| BLK | BlackRock | 3/9 | 11% | +19% | 29% |
| C | Citigroup | 3/9 | 7% | +6% | — |
| CB | Chubb | 6/9 | 15% | +7% | — |
| GS | Goldman Sachs | 5/9 | 14% | +9% | — |
| JPM | JPMorgan Chase | 3/9 | 16% | +3% | — |
| MA | Mastercard | 7/9 | 210% | +16% | 58% |
| MS | Morgan Stanley | 3/9 | 16% | +14% | — |
| PGR | Progressive | 6/9 | 40% | +16% | — |
| SCHW | Charles Schwab | 6/9 | 18% | +22% | — |
| SPGI | S&P Global | 7/9 | 14% | +8% | 42% |
| USB | U.S. Bancorp | 7/9 | 12% | +4% | — |
| V | Visa | 5/9 | 64% | +11% | 60% |
| WFC | Wells Fargo | 3/9 | 12% | +2% | — |
A sample of 15 companies in the sector including the target, alphabetical, unranked. Data from the latest SEC annual reports.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
A simplified retrospective read: no analyst forecast (not available historically); the source is the annual report as of the date, so neighbouring quarters can rest on the same data. Quarters with the same classification in a row are merged into one row — each row is one change in the read, not a separate quarter. One ticker is an illustration of the classification logic, not statistics. How we calculate →
The last few quarters are recent context, not a fixed rate. Consensus for near quarters is set low, so companies clear it routinely; over long horizons the forecasts run the other way, too high.
A description of what the market and analysts expect. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. Analyst forecasts run systematically optimistic over long horizons — read them with that discount.