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
U.S. Bancorp
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Weak signals across every dimension
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
1 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.
Stable quality
2 signals unavailable
Profitability
4/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
1/2
Valuation is the clearest edge here: the P/E of 13.1× sits -25% below the sector median 17.4×, and P/B of 1.6× runs -46% below its median 2.9× — both pointing to a price that trails the broader Financials peer group. Debt/EBITDA of 0.0× lands -100% below the sector median 1.4×, which places the balance sheet in the top quartile for health. ROE, at 12.2%, runs -18% below the sector median 15.0%, and revenue grew 4.4% year over year against a sector median of 7.9% — both trailing the peer group. The F-Score of 7/9 reflects a stable but unexceptional picture: profitability sub-scores are full, while efficiency lags. Consensus lines up with the realized three-year record — analysts forecast growth that the SEC filing track record broadly supports — and the beat rate over eight quarters has been strong, with the most recent quarter coming in at 5.5% above consensus.
| Ticker | Name | F-Score | ROE | Revenue YoY | Op. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXP | American Express | 4/9 | 34% |
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 USB reports on October 15, 2026, track net interest income and fee revenue year over year against the current 7.94% growth rate, which sits 45% below the sector median. Also check whether the F-Score efficiency signals — currently 1/2 — show any improvement in asset turnover.
In the annual report, focus on the risk factors and MD&A sections covering loan loss provisions and capital adequacy ratios. USB's Debt/EBITDA of 1.42× is well below the sector median, but management's commentary on deposit costs and net interest margin pressure will clarify whether that leverage advantage is durable.
Pick two or three companies from the same-sector table in section 06 and line up one metric — P/B at 2.87× or ROE at 15.0% are natural starting points given USB's mixed signals. The table is alphabetical with no ranking, so the comparison is yours to frame without any implied ordering.
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: 1.890.000.000.00
Over 4 years: +16%-2%+4%
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 8 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.
| +6% |
| — |
| 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 | 5/9 | 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.