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
Wells Fargo & Company
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Lower valuation, weak fundamentals
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
2 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.
Weak fundamentals
2 signals unavailable
Profitability
1/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
0/2
Cheap multiples are the most visible feature here: the P/E of 12.9× sits -26% below the sector median of 17.4×, and P/B of 1.5× runs -47% below its median of 2.9× — a discount that looks wide on paper. The F-Score of 3/9 tells a different story, with the efficiency sub-score at zero and profitability weak; ROE of 11.8% trails the sector median of 15.0% by -21%, and revenue growth of 1.7% lags the median of 7.9% by -79%. That combination — low price, weak returns, slow growth — is the pattern the composite of 50/100 reflects. The forward picture is less bleak: consensus tends to run optimistic, yet here the realized SEC earnings record and the beat rate both lean the other way, with the last quarter's EPS coming in 16.6% above estimates — a case where the market may be pricing in less than the track record warrants.
| 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.
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 market prices in earnings growth; analyst sentiment is weakening; 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.
Revenue and margins in the next quarterly 10-Q will show whether the profitability signals in the F-Score hold. Re-run the WFC analysis once it is published.
The full WFC annual report on SEC EDGAR has the risk factors, the management discussion (MD&A), and the disclosures that numbers alone do not capture.
The same-sector table, where available, is an alphabetical sample with no ranking. Pick 2-3 companies yourself and line up P/E, margin, and F-Score: a single number only means something in its industry context.
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: 6.475.1457.03—
Over 4 years: -6%+11%-0%+2%
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 6 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 & Company | 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.
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.