vincii we show the working

← Materials

MOS

Mosaic

Materials · fiscal year ending 2025-12-31

Through the investors’ lenses

Each of these investors has said in public what they look at before buying. Click a name to see how this company measures up — a tick where it passes one of their tests, a cross where it does not.

Warren Buffett 2/4
MeasureMOSChecked against
Owner earnings$231.20mpositive
Return on equity4.5%median 11.7%
Debt to equity0.35xmedian 0.79x
Operating margin6.8%median 15.0%

Passes 2 of 4. To be clear: Warren Buffett has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Terry Smith 1/4
MeasureMOSChecked against
Return on capital employed5.0%median 10.1%
Cash conversion1.53xmedian 1.78x
Operating margin6.8%median 15.0%
Debt to equity0.35xmedian 0.79x

Passes 1 of 4. To be clear: Terry Smith has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Charlie Munger 0/3
MeasureMOSChecked against
Return on capital employed5.0%median 10.1%
Return on equity4.5%median 11.7%
Operating margin6.8%median 15.0%

Passes 0 of 3. To be clear: Charlie Munger has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Chuck Akre 1/4
MeasureMOSChecked against
Return on equity4.5%median 11.7%
Debt to equity0.35xmedian 0.79x
Cash conversion1.53xmedian 1.78x
Return on equity, sustained2 of 108 of 10 above median

Passes 1 of 4. To be clear: Chuck Akre has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Philip Fisher 1/4
MeasureMOSChecked against
Operating margin6.8%median 15.0%
Net margin4.5%median 10.2%
Return on capital employed5.0%median 10.1%
Operating margin, held or improving6.8%10-yr median 6.3%

Passes 1 of 4. To be clear: Philip Fisher has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Walter Schloss 2/2
MeasureMOSChecked against
Current ratio1.32xmedian 1.25x
Debt to equity0.35xmedian 0.79x

Passes 2 of 2. To be clear: Walter Schloss has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Benjamin Graham 0/3
MeasureMOSChecked against
Current ratio1.32x2.00x published
Long-term debt to working capital3.39x1.00x published
Positive earnings, ten years running6 yrs10 published

Passes 0 of 3. To be clear: Benjamin Graham has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Joel Greenblatt 0/1
MeasureMOSChecked against
Return on capital employed5.0%median 10.1%

Passes 0 of 1. To be clear: Joel Greenblatt has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

Peter Lynch 1/2
MeasureMOSChecked against
Debt to equity0.35xmedian 0.79x
Net margin4.5%median 10.2%

Passes 1 of 2. To be clear: Peter Lynch has never said anything about Mosaic. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →

BasisPayoutWhy
GAAP earnings51.8%
why
A single year's earnings for a commodity producer can be several times the through-cycle average. This ratio computed in a trough looks alarming and in a peak looks trivial; neither describes whether the dividend is affordable across a cycle.
Operating cash flow34.0%
why
Before capital spending.
Free cash flownegative
why
OCF fell $535m short of capex — the dividend was not funded from free cash flow.
Nothing is marked as applying, deliberately. The basis that governs here is free cash flow, and this year it yields no ratio at all. The figure above is shown for completeness; treating it as the answer is the substitution this page exists to prevent.

Spread between highest and lowest: 17.8 percentage points. Same filings, different denominators.

Coverage rating 32 / 100 — Strained. ? Peer standing 28/50Direction 4/30Stability 0/20

Against its own history: 35.0% this year vs 11.5% median over the prior 5. A gap this size is usually a one-off — acquisition, settlement, cyclical trough — not a dividend that stopped being funded. The rating reads the latest year; the table shows the trend.

Free cash flow payout, last 6 years

Fiscal yearPayout
2023-12-3135.0%
2022-12-317.4%
2021-12-3111.5%
2020-12-3118.4%
2018-12-318.5%
2017-12-31182.5%
Coverage worsened sharply this year, 7.4% to 35.0%, after no clear trend before it. One year is not a trend, but it is worth knowing which direction the last one moved.

56% of the 36 materials here pay out more.

The arithmetic

Where the figures came from

All public at sec.gov — you should not have to take our word for it.


Computed straight from SEC XBRL. A number that looks wrong to you is more useful to us than agreement — tell us.

Also on: rated strained · when it files.

When this changes

Every figure above is recomputed whenever Mosaic files. The monthly letter carries what filed, what moved, and one finding computed across every company here.

Get the letter →