MTX · Materials(industrial inorganic chemicals) · 10 years of annual accounts filed with the SEC · latest fiscal year ended 2025-12-31
Signed in, this page also says what this company is inside your own portfolio: its weight, its share of your risk, and what buying or selling some of it would change. Sign in ›
Minerals Technologies Inc reported revenue of $2.1 billion in fiscal 2025, after growing 2.6% a year over the previous 9 years. Its operating margin narrowed from 13.7% in 2016 to 2.3%, and it earned 2.4% on its invested capital in the latest year. Of the $2.1 billion its operations generated over 10 years, 38.0% went back into the business and 17.7% to buybacks; the share count fell 10.8%. On the accounting screens, it passes 4 of 9 Piotroski tests, its Altman Z'' of 4.61 is in the safe zone and its Beneish M-score is below the -1.78 line; 1 of the six cross-checks between its statements fires.
Revenue, fiscal 20252.1B+2.6% a year over 9 years
Operating margin2.3%gross margin 25.0%
Return on invested capital2.4%6.0% on average over 5 years
Free cash flow after stock pay74.7M3.6% of revenue
Net debt ÷ EBITDA—net debt 632.3M
Piotroski F-score4/9tests of improvement passed
Is it growing?
Revenue and the operating income it turns into. Growth that does not reach operating income is growth bought with margin.
RevenueOperating income
01B2B3B
2016Revenue 1.6BOperating income 223.9M
2017Revenue 1.7BOperating income 244.4M
2018Revenue 1.8BOperating income 255.9M
2019Revenue 1.8BOperating income 208.7M
2020Revenue 1.6BOperating income 187.9M
2021Revenue 1.9BOperating income 235.7M
2022Revenue 2.1BOperating income 214.8M
2023Revenue 2.2BOperating income 171.8M
2024Revenue 2.1BOperating income 286.5M
2025Revenue 2.1BOperating income 47.4M
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Compound growth a year
3 yrs
5 yrs
9 yrs
Revenue
-0.8%
+5.4%
+2.6%
Operating income
-39.6%
-24.1%
-15.8%
Free cash flow per share
+56.9%
-11.5%
-5.6%
Dividend per share
+31.7%
+17.9%
+9.6%
Shares
-1.4%
-1.7%
-1.3%
Falling shares are buybacks: each remaining share owns more of the company.
Does it earn more than its capital costs?
Margins say how much of each sale is kept; return on invested capital says how much the business earns on the money it needs to operate. Growth only creates value when that return is above the cost of the capital.
Needs a cost of capital, which comes from the valuation below.
Return on equity
-1.1%
Return on assets
-0.5%
Asset turnover
0.60×
Research & development
1.1% of revenue
Overheads (SG&A)
10.0% of revenue
Is the profit cash, and where does the cash go?
Net income is an accounting opinion; free cash flow is what was left in the bank after investing. Stock-based pay does not leave the bank — shareholders pay it through dilution — so it is shown taken off as well.
Net incomeFree cash flowAfter stock-based pay
-100M0100M200M
2016Net income 133.4MFree cash flow 162.7MAfter stock-based pay 156.4M
2017Net income 195.1MFree cash flow 130.9MAfter stock-based pay 122.8M
2018Net income 169.0MFree cash flow 127.7MAfter stock-based pay 121.5M
2019Net income 132.7MFree cash flow 173.3MAfter stock-based pay 165.2M
2020Net income 112.4MFree cash flow 173.8MAfter stock-based pay 163.6M
2021Net income 164.4MFree cash flow 146.4MAfter stock-based pay 135.7M
2022Net income 122.2MFree cash flow 23.4MAfter stock-based pay 13.0M
2023Net income 84.1MFree cash flow 140.1MAfter stock-based pay 128.8M
2024Net income 167.1MFree cash flow 146.9MAfter stock-based pay 135.1M
2025Net income -18.4MFree cash flow 86.6MAfter stock-based pay 74.7M
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Where 10 years of operating cash went, 2016–2025
2.1B generated by the business. Each band is its share of that total.
Reinvested in the business 38%805.2M
Acquisitions 17%354.3M
Dividends 4%83.7M
Share buybacks 18%373.7M
Kept, or used to pay down debt 24%500.1M
Over the same years it paid 95.0M in stock. The share count fell 10.8%. 278.7M of the buybacks went beyond offsetting that dilution.
Per share
Earnings per shareFree cash flow per shareDividend per share
-$2$0$2$4$6
2016Earnings per share $3.79Free cash flow per share $4.62Dividend per share $0.20
2017Earnings per share $5.48Free cash flow per share $3.68Dividend per share $0.20
2018Earnings per share $4.75Free cash flow per share $3.59Dividend per share $0.20
2019Earnings per share $3.78Free cash flow per share $4.94Dividend per share $0.20
2020Earnings per share $3.29Free cash flow per share $5.08Dividend per share $0.20
2021Earnings per share $4.86Free cash flow per share $4.33Dividend per share $0.20
2022Earnings per share $3.73Free cash flow per share $0.71Dividend per share $0.20
2023Earnings per share $2.58Free cash flow per share $4.30Dividend per share $0.25
2024Earnings per share $5.17Free cash flow per share $4.55Dividend per share $0.41
2025Earnings per share $-0.59Free cash flow per share $2.76Dividend per share $0.45
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Shares outstanding
Diluted shares
30M32M34M36M
2016Diluted shares 35.2M
2017Diluted shares 35.6M
2018Diluted shares 35.6M
2019Diluted shares 35.1M
2020Diluted shares 34.2M
2021Diluted shares 33.8M
2022Diluted shares 32.8M
2023Diluted shares 32.6M
2024Diluted shares 32.3M
2025Diluted shares 31.4M
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Debt and liquidity
Debt is not bad in itself; debt the business cannot service in a bad year is. Net debt is debt minus cash, and below zero the company holds more cash than it owes.
Net debt
00.25B0.50B0.75B1.00B
2016Net debt 888.2M
2017Net debt 751.4M
2018Net debt 702.3M
2019Net debt 584.8M
2020Net debt 566.5M
2021Net debt 637.5M
2022Net debt 695.4M
2023Net debt 611.9M
2024Net debt 633.0M
2025Net debt 632.3M
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Net debt ÷ EBITDA
—
Interest coverage
— operating income ÷ interest
Current ratio
2.08 current assets ÷ current liabilities
Cash conversion cycle
109 days collects in 70d, stock 82d, pays in 44d
Three classic screens of the accounts
Each asks a different question of the same statements — is it improving, does it look like a company heading for distress, do the accounts resemble ones that were manipulated. None is a verdict; each shows what moves it.
Piotroski F-score
Is the business improving? Nine yes-or-no tests, this year against last.
4of 9 tests passed
✕ProfitableReturn on assets above zerofailed
✓Cash from operationsOperating cash flow above zeropassed
✕Profitability improvedReturn on assets higher than a year beforefailed
✓Profit backed by cashOperating cash flow above net income (low accruals)passed
✓Less long-term debtLong-term debt as a share of assets fellpassed
✕More liquidCurrent ratio higher than a year beforefailed
✓No new sharesShare count did not growpassed
✕Better gross marginGross margin higher than a year beforefailed
✕Sells more per assetAsset turnover higher than a year beforefailed
Where it misleads: it measures change, not level. An excellent business that stood still for a year scores low; a poor one recovering from a disaster scores high.
Altman Z''-score
Does the balance sheet look like those of companies that went bankrupt?
4.61safe zone
1.12.6
Working capital ÷ assets 0.17 × 6.56+1.13
Retained earnings ÷ assets 0.72 × 3.26+2.33
Operating income ÷ assets 0.01 × 6.72+0.09
Equity ÷ liabilities 1.00 × 1.05+1.05
Where it misleads: buybacks. A company that returns so much cash that its equity turns small or negative sinks the last two ratios without being anywhere near bankruptcy. Banks and insurers do not fit the model at all.
Beneish M-score
Do the accounts resemble those of companies that manipulated their earnings?
-2.75below the -1.78 line
-1.78
Receivables vs sales 1.06+0.98
Gross margin slipping 1.03+0.55
Soft assets 0.99+0.40
Sales growth 0.98+0.87
Slower depreciation 1.00 (not reported, set to 1)+0.12
Overheads vs sales 1.02-0.17
Profit not in cash -0.06-0.29
Leverage rising 1.09-0.36
Where it misleads: fast growth and acquisitions. Sales growth carries a heavy weight, so a company growing 50% a year scores like a suspect without having done anything. It is a screen from a 1999 study, not an accusation.
Where the statements disagree
Cross-checks between the income statement, the balance sheet and the cash flow for the latest year, each with the benign reading and the worrying one.
The effective tax rate is -35.0%.
Benign
A favourable geographic mix, or legitimate tax credits.
Worrying
Not sustainable; projecting it forward inflates the valuation.
What is it worth, under which assumptions?
A company is worth the cash it will generate, brought back to today. This model projects revenue with growth that fades over the years, applies a free cash flow margin, and discounts the result at the cost of capital. Every assumption says where it came from, and all of them can be changed.
The SEC accounts lack the lines needed for revenue, free cash flow or the share count, so there is no DCF for this company.
What it has filed lately
The last twelve months at the SEC, most important first: annual and quarterly reports, events, large holders and insiders.
From the Form 13F of the 28 institutions followed on this site, as of the end of their last reported quarter. A 13F is filed up to 45 days later and shows only long positions in US-listed shares.
Accounts from the company's own SEC filings; lines some companies do not report are shown as a dash rather than estimated. The risk-free rate is the 10-year US Treasury yield. A DCF is a way of making assumptions explicit, not a forecast: it states what the company would be worth if the assumptions held. The scores are screens that point where to look, not verdicts. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell.