For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-27): Designation Low · Gem Score -41 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 8 · Value -73 · Sentiment -8 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $50.81 vs $75.27 at analysis
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Nutrien Ltd.
NTR NYSENutrien Ltd. is a global agricultural inputs company focused on providing crop nutrients and farm services to growers worldwide. The company operates an integrated business model built around four core segments: Retail, Potash, Nitrogen and Phosphate. Nutrien produces a broad range of potash, nitrogen and phosphate fertilizers through its upstream manufacturing assets, primarily located in North America, and distributes these products via an extensive midstream logistics network to customers across global agricultural markets. Through its Nutrien Ag Solutions retail division, it supplies farmers with crop nutrients, crop protection products, seed, proprietary plant nutrition offerings, agronomic consulting, application services, digital agriculture tools and grower financing, delivered through a large network of retail locations in North America, Australia and South America. Headquartered in Saskatoon, Canada, Nutrien plays a central role in modern food production by combining large-scale fertilizer production with on-the-ground agronomic support, serving both commodity fertilizer markets and full-acre farm input needs.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
This company does not file structured financial statements with the U.S. SEC, so quarterly figures aren't available from our filings-based data engine. Annual figures shown here come from the sources that do cover it.
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 4.66
Total Equity: $25.37B
Shares: 486,518,000
Total Debt: $10.22B
Cash: $701.00M
EBITDA: $6.11B
Total Debt: $10.22B
Cash: $701.00M
Revenue: $26.89B
Revenue: $26.89B
Revenue: $26.89B
Total Equity: $25.37B
Tax Rate: 24.7%
Equity: $25.37B
Total Debt: $10.22B
Cash: $701.00M
Current Liabilities: $11.04B
Long-Term Debt: $9.35B
Total Debt: $10.22B
Total Equity: $25.37B
Shares: 486,518,000
Shares: 486,518,000
CapEx: -$1.88B
Shares: 486,518,000
Stock Price: $75.27
Net Income: $2.27B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 24, 2026 7:03am (44d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $27.7B | $37.9B | $29.1B | $26.0B | $26.9B |
| Cost of Revenue | $18.3B | $22.5B | $20.6B | $18.4B | $18.5B |
| Gross Profit | $9.4B | $15.4B | $8.5B | $7.5B | $8.3B |
| Operating Expenses | $4.6B | $4.6B | $5.7B | $5.7B | $4.6B |
| Operating Income | $4.8B | $10.8B | $2.7B | $1.9B | $3.7B |
| Net Income | $3.2B | $7.7B | $1.3B | $674.0M | $2.3B |
| EBITDA | $6.7B | $12.8B | $4.9B | $4.2B | $6.1B |
| EPS | $5.53 | $14.22 | $2.53 | $1.36 | $4.66 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $5.52 | $14.18 | $2.53 | $1.36 | $4.66 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 24, 2026 7:00am (44d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $499.0M | $901.0M | $941.0M | $853.0M | $701.0M |
| Total Current Assets | $13.8B | $16.3B | $14.2B | $13.8B | $14.7B |
| Total Assets | $50.0B | $54.6B | $52.7B | $51.8B | $52.3B |
| Current Liabilities | $12.4B | $14.3B | $12.1B | $12.0B | $11.0B |
| Long-Term Debt | $7.5B | $8.0B | $8.9B | $8.9B | $9.4B |
| Total Liabilities | $26.3B | $28.7B | $27.5B | $27.4B | $26.9B |
| Total Equity | $23.7B | $25.9B | $25.2B | $24.4B | $25.4B |
| Retained Earnings | $8.2B | $11.9B | $11.5B | $11.1B | $12.1B |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 24, 2026 7:00am (44d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $3.9B | $8.1B | $5.1B | $3.5B | $4.0B |
| Capital Expenditure | -$1.8B | -$2.2B | -$2.5B | -$2.0B | -$1.9B |
| Free Cash Flow | $2.1B | $5.9B | $2.6B | $1.5B | $2.1B |
| Acquisitions (net) | -$88.0M | -$407.0M | -$153.0M | -$21.0M | -$23.0M |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $86.0M | $1.0B | $1.5B | $1.0B | $998.0M |
| Dividends Paid | -$1.0B | -$1.0B | -$1.0B | -$1.1B | -$1.1B |
| Stock Buybacks | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Change in Cash | -$955.0M | $402.0M | $40.0M | -$88.0M | -$152.0M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 24, 2026 7:03am (44d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +36.7% | -23.3% | -10.6% | +3.5% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +63.9% | -45.1% | -11.1% | +10.8% |
| Operating Income Growth | +126.1% | -74.6% | -32.4% | +101.3% |
| Net Income Growth | +142.9% | -83.6% | -46.4% | +236.4% |
| EBITDA Growth | +90.4% | -61.7% | -14.6% | +45.5% |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:10am (50d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-30 | $0.55 | — | — | — |
| 2026-03-31 | $0.55 | — | — | — |
| 2025-06-30 | $0.55 | — | — | — |
| 2025-03-31 | $0.55 | — | — | — |
| 2024-12-31 | $0.54 | — | — | — |
| 2024-09-27 | $0.54 | — | — | — |
| 2024-06-28 | $0.54 | — | — | — |
| 2024-03-27 | $0.54 | — | — | — |
| 2023-12-28 | $0.53 | — | — | — |
| 2023-09-28 | $0.53 | — | — | — |
| 2023-06-29 | $0.53 | — | — | — |
| 2023-03-30 | $0.53 | — | — | — |
| 2022-12-29 | $0.48 | — | — | — |
| 2022-09-28 | $0.48 | — | — | — |
| 2022-06-29 | $0.48 | — | — | — |
| 2022-03-30 | $0.48 | — | — | — |
| 2021-12-30 | $0.46 | — | — | — |
| 2021-09-28 | $0.46 | — | — | — |
| 2021-06-29 | $0.46 | — | — | — |
| 2021-03-30 | $0.46 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-08-24 07:11Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-24 07:31The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.
Claude Reading
Looking at the raw trajectory first: revenue collapsed from $37.9B (2022) to $26.0B (2024), a 31% peak-to-trough drop, before nudging back to $26.9B in 2025 (+3.5% YoY). Net income tells the real cyclical story — $7.66B in 2022, $674M in 2024, now recovering to $2.27B. Operating margin similarly whipsawed from 28.5% (2022) to 7.2% (2024) to 13.9% (2025). This is textbook fertilizer cyclicality, not a broken business. The 2025 recovery is real: gross margin expanded from 29.0% to 31.1%, operating income more than doubled, and FCF of $2.13B against $1.04B in dividends leaves genuine cushion. ROIC at 8.1% is mid-cycle-ish — not great, not disastrous for a capital-intensive integrated producer.
Now the model stack. The synthesis screams "overvalued at $45.74 fair value vs $75.27" — a 39% haircut. I dissent on the magnitude. The DCF is almost certainly anchoring on either TTM depressed numbers or an aggressive mean-reversion below current run-rate. Consider: 2025 delivered $2.27B NI on a still-recovering pricing environment; a normalized mid-cycle earnings power for Nutrien is plausibly $2.5-3.5B, which at 14-15x puts fair value in the $65-80 range, not $45. EV/EBITDA at 7.6x is actually below the 8-10x historical range for integrated fertilizer names — hardly the "priced for perfection" setup the synthesis implies. The pre-flight note is sharper than the synthesis: it correctly identifies that the 16x P/E reflects normalized earnings expectations, not TTM. The narrative layer's claim that "fundamentals justify $45-50" leans hard on a bearish normalized assumption I don't think survives scrutiny — 2025 isn't peak-cycle, it's early-recovery, and the model is treating it as if elevated pricing must revert further.
The contrarian-to-the-contrarians case: potash pricing has structurally re-based higher post-Belarus sanctions (Belaruskali was ~18% of global supply), nitrogen capacity additions have been muted due to capex discipline and ESG financing friction, and Nutrien's retail segment (~$16B revenue, more stable margins) genuinely does dampen the commodity beta the bears assume. Debt/equity at 0.40 and $10.2B total debt against $25.4B equity is conservative — this isn't a levered cyclical that blows up in a downturn. The 2.9% dividend yield with 47% payout is defensible through-cycle. That said, the bears aren't wrong that this is a price-taker in commodity markets with no moat in upstream, and the $701M cash position is thin against $10.2B debt if pricing rolls over hard. Capex of $1.88B eating nearly half of OCF also limits FCF conversion.
Where the data is thin: quarterly revenue/NI series is missing entirely from the file, which is a real gap for a cyclical name where the quarterly cadence tells you whether recovery is accelerating or stalling. The "insufficient_data" flag on quarterly trend is doing more work than acknowledged. Also missing: any read on 2025 potash/nitrogen realized pricing vs. spot, which would let you triangulate whether the earnings recovery has legs into 2026. Market-forces module failed entirely — unhelpful. I'd weight the synthesis verdict lower given these gaps and the fact that DCF on a cyclical is a notoriously bad tool (it always looks overvalued near troughs recovering and undervalued near peaks). My read: NTR is fairly valued to modestly rich here, not egregiously overvalued. Fair value band is $65-75 on normalized earnings of $2.75-3.25B at 14-15x, meaning the current $75.27 is at the top of fair, not 39% above it. I'd want to buy sub-$65 for a real margin of safety; I wouldn't short here given the cyclical recovery still has runway and the balance sheet is fine.
GPT Reading
The key fact on Nutrien is that today’s earnings base is not the 2022 windfall, nor the 2024 trough, but something in between—and the current price is not obviously demanding if you use that lens. Revenue in 2025 recovered to $26.89B from $25.97B, operating income doubled to $3.74B from $1.86B, and net income rose to $2.27B from just $674M. That matters because the stock is being judged by headline cyclicality, yet the business has already shown it can re-expand materially off depressed conditions without needing anything like 2022’s extraordinary $37.88B of revenue and $7.66B of net income. At $75.27, the stock trades at 16.2x earnings, 7.6x EV/EBITDA, 1.36x sales, and 1.44x book. For a fertilizer-heavy agricultural input company, those are not bargain-basement multiples, but neither are they “supercycle still fully priced” multiples if 2025’s $2.27B is closer to a low-mid cycle earnings base than a peak. The balance sheet also looks manageable rather than stressed: $10.22B of debt against $25.37B of equity, with debt/equity at 0.40 and a current ratio of 1.34.
What stands out most is the cash generation versus the accounting cyclicality. In 2025, operating cash flow was $4.01B and free cash flow was $2.13B after $1.88B of capex. That is a 5.9% FCF yield on the current $35.9B market cap—not screamingly cheap, but solid for a company that still has optionality to earn much more in tighter nutrient markets. The gap between $2.13B of FCF and $2.27B of net income also suggests earnings quality is decent, not propped up by working-capital gimmicks or aggressive non-cash addbacks. Meanwhile, margins in 2025 normalized to respectable levels: gross margin 31.1%, operating margin 13.9%, net margin 8.4%. Those are miles below 2022’s boom, but well above 2024’s depressed operating result. To me, the story the numbers tell is less “structurally impaired commodity producer” and more “quality cyclical earning through a trough with a durable cash engine.” The 2.9% dividend yield and 46.8% payout ratio reinforce that this is a cash-returning mature earner, not a balance-sheet repair case.
I think the main error in the outright-bearish valuation outputs is anchoring too heavily to a normalized earnings framework that assumes today’s profitability is still artificially elevated. But on the actual five-year numbers, 2025 net income of $2.27B is below 2021’s $3.15B despite a similar revenue band ($26.89B vs $27.71B), which implies the current earnings base is not remotely stretched. If anything, there is room for margin recovery before one has to invoke another geopolitical supply shock. Return metrics—ROE 8.9%, ROIC 8.1%, ROA 4.3%—are fine, not exceptional, but they are being measured off a year that is only partially recovered. Put differently, if Nutrien can sustain something like $4B of operating cash flow and $2B+ of FCF through an imperfect part of the cycle, a mid-teens P/E is close to fair and perhaps a little cheap. I do not see evidence here for a fair value in the mid-$40s unless one assumes both earnings and cash flow roll back meaningfully from 2025 levels.
The strongest case against this view is straightforward: this remains a commodity-influenced business with poor top-line growth and volatile profitability, and the stock is not cheap enough to ignore that. Five-year revenue CAGR is negative 3.8%, FCF CAGR is negative 9.6%, and annual revenue still sits far below the 2022 peak. The P/E of 16x can be read as expensive for a company with single-digit ROIC, especially if 2025’s rebound in operating income to $3.74B proves temporary. Net cash is not a cushion here—cash is only $701M versus $10.22B of debt—so this is a levered cyclical, not a fortress balance sheet compounder. A smart bear would also argue that the market cap of $35.9B against 2025 FCF of $2.13B means investors are paying nearly 17x free cash flow for a business with no real structural growth demonstrated in the historical revenue line. That argument has force, and it is why I am not aggressively bullish. I just weigh it differently because the cash generation and earnings rebound already visible in 2025 make the “overvalued by ~40%” call look too harsh.
What would change my mind? If 2026 shows that 2025 was a head fake—specifically, if revenue slips back below $26B, operating income falls under $3.0B, and free cash flow drops under $1.5B while leverage remains around current levels—then I would move to clearly overvalued at $75. Conversely, if Nutrien can convert this recovery into another year of $3.5B+ operating income and $2.5B+ FCF without a commodity spike, then the market is likely right to hold the stock in the $75-85 range and perhaps above. For now, I think this is a decent cyclical cash generator priced around fair value, with a modest bias that the market is underestimating the durability of normalized earnings rather than overestimating them.
Grok Reading
The numbers describe a classic fertilizer cycle trough-and-bounce, not a structural reset. Revenue fell from the $37.88B super-cycle peak in 2022 to $25.97B in 2024 before a modest 3.5% rebound to $26.89B in 2025; more important is the earnings path underneath. Net income collapsed from $7.66B to $674M across that same window, then snapped back to $2.27B in 2025 as operating income doubled from $1.86B to $3.74B and gross margin held near 31%. Free cash flow of $2.13B on a $35.9B equity value produces a roughly 5.9% FCF yield, supported by $4.01B of operating cash against $1.88B of capex—quality cash conversion for a heavy industrial. Leverage is contained at 0.40 debt-to-equity with net debt around $9.5B, so the balance sheet is not forcing distress sales of product into a soft market. At 7.6x EV/EBITDA and 16x trailing earnings on what still looks like early-to-mid recovery numbers rather than peak, the market is not pricing a return to 2022 fantasy; it is pricing durability of something closer to 2025 run-rate plus a geopolitical scarcity premium on potash and nitrogen.
That is a cleaner story than the rule-based “overvalued by 39%” composite implies. A $45–51 intrinsic anchor treats 2025 profitability as unsustainably elevated and forces a deep mid-cycle mean reversion that the current margin and cash-flow data do not yet confirm. Nutrien is not a pure-play commodity miner: the retail distribution network and integrated nitrogen/potash/phosphate system give it volume and mix levers pure upstream peers lack, which is why operating leverage returned so sharply once pricing stabilized. ROE at 8.9% and ROIC at 8.1% are mediocre, not broken, and a 2.9% dividend covered at a 47% payout is consistent with a mature earner returning cash while the cycle heals. Five-year revenue CAGR of −3.8% and FCF CAGR of −9.6% correctly flag that the company has not grown through the cycle; they do not prove that $2.27B of net income is a ceiling that must immediately halve.
The strongest case against this more constructive framing is straightforward and quantitative. Strip out the 2022 spike and you still have a business whose earnings power has been violently cyclical—$3.15B in 2021, $1.26B in 2023, $674M in 2024—so capitalizing $2.27B at mid-teens multiples assumes the current fertilizer price deck holds. EV/FCF near 21x is not cheap if volumes stagnate and nitrogen/potash realizations grind lower as Russian and Belarusian supply normalizes and acreage economics weaken under macro headwinds. The narrative layer is explicit that roughly $25 of the share price is story—food security, supply shocks, retail synergy—rather than DCF at normalized prices, and narrative durability is labeled fragile for good reason. A smart opponent would also note that the 236% earnings rebound off the 2024 trough mechanically flatters momentum statistics and that P/B of 1.44x on a capital-intensive chemical asset base leaves limited downside cushion if ROIC stays sub-10%. Those points justify a discount to industrial compounders; they do not justify marking the equity at roughly 10x trough-recovery earnings as the composite model does.
I would reverse to a clear undervalued call if 2026 revenue holds above $27B with operating margin sustained at or above 13% and FCF stays north of $2B, confirming 2025 as a base rather than a dead-cat bounce; I would flip decisively bearish if potash and nitrogen benchmarks break enough to push net income back under $1.5B or if net debt begins rising while FCF compresses below $1.5B.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Nutrien is a mature agricultural inputs business showing textbook cyclicality: revenue peaked at $37.9B in 2022 with 28.5% operating margins during the potash/nitrogen spike, then normalized to $26-27B with operating margins compressing to 7.1% in 2024 before recovering to 13.9% in 2025. Net income tracked the same arc ($7.66B to $674M to $2.27B). Through the full cycle FCF stayed positive every year ($1.5B-$5.9B), which is the key quality signal - this business self-funds through the trough. Earnings quality is genuinely clean: OCF/NI at 2.67x, accruals -3.7% of assets, Beneish M at -2.61, no mechanical red flags. Capital allocation has been shareholder-friendly with diluted shares shrinking from 571M to 486M (-3.9% CAGR), roughly 15% reduction in four years. Balance sheet is the soft spot: net debt of $9.52B against only $701M liquid cash, with $873M short-term debt exceeding cash on hand, and Altman Z at 1.96 sits in the grey zone. That leverage is serviceable given normalized FCF around $2B+, but it removes any cushion for a deeper commodity downturn. Not a fortress, but a competent operator in a cyclical, capital-intensive industry.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Debt maturity schedule and refinancing exposure on the $873M short-term debt
- Potash and nitrogen price sensitivity disclosures and hedging posture
- Retail segment (Nutrien Ag Solutions) contribution stability versus commodity wholesale volatility
- Capex composition - maintenance versus growth - to confirm $2B+ FCF is sustainable
- Insider transaction pattern and executive compensation structure
The composite fair value lands at $50.81 with the signal-adjusted read at $45.74, implying roughly 35-40% downside from the $75.27 quote. The three methods bracket tightly and sensibly: DCF $52.36, anchored P/E $61.17, EPV floor $37.34. There is no runaway output to discount here, and earnings quality is high (score 2) so no haircut is needed on the deserved value. If anything, the Solid quality grade justifies leaning toward the anchored-P/E end (~$61) rather than the EPV floor, but even that generous read is ~19% below spot.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Forward potash and nitrogen price guidance and volume commitments in next earnings
- Retail segment normalized EBITDA run-rate ex commodity swing
- Capex and buyback pace vs FCF at strip pricing
- Net debt trajectory and any refinancing near-term
- Management's mid-cycle margin assumptions on latest call
The macro tape is nominally risk-on (+32) but shallow and one day old, and with a beta near 1.06 NTR gets no special lift from it. What matters more for this name is the commodity/agricultural-inputs narrative, which is currently 'strong but fragile': the food-security and Russia/Belarus potash-scarcity story is still doing work, keeping a bid under fertilizer names, but its durability is low and any sign of normalizing potash/nitrogen supply or softer ag demand tends to hit sentiment fast. Recent 3-month action (+3.5% vs a -3.8% longer trend) suggests the tape has stopped punishing the name but hasn't embraced a new bull story either. Macro cross-currents are mixed for NTR specifically: a 4.69% 10y and stretched 25.8x market PE are a generic drag on cyclicals, while a benign VIX (15.1) and risk-on drift help commodity-linked cyclicals at the margin. Analyst tone on fertilizer names has drifted to 'hold with cyclical caution' rather than upgrade cycles, which caps narrative energy. Net: no dominant force in either direction — a fragile tailwind narrative offset by late-cycle skepticism and rate pressure on cyclicals.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Potash spot pricing trend and any signal of Russian/Belarusian export normalization
- Sell-side target revisions on NTR and MOS after next fertilizer price prints
- Whether the risk-on regime persists beyond a few days or reverses on a VIX spike
- Ag equipment / grain price tape (corn, soy) as a read-through to fertilizer demand narrative
Fertilizer is a cyclical, geopolitically-priced commodity dressed as a secular food-security story. The durable part is real: crop nutrient tonnage grows with global calorie demand and Nutrien owns low-cost potash and gas-advantaged nitrogen. The transient part is the price — the Russia/Belarus dislocation and European gas spike that lifted 2022-era margins are decaying as trade re-routes and capacity restarts. Layer on a slowdown-phase sector, industry-wide margin compression, and a 4.69% 10y that raises grower and dealer financing costs, and the honest world read is a business whose volumes grind forward while its unit economics normalize. Retail consolidation is a genuine structural change to the model's stability, not a growth engine. Nutrien is a large, integrated survivor of a flat-tonnage, price-volatile market — a Holding franchise, not a compounder.
When we made this prediction on Aug 24, 2026, NTR was $73.64. We expect it to be $66.00 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $55.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 24, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.
Post-Report Due Diligence NOTES
Evidence for a closer look, not a verdict — no score or designation on this page has been changed by it. Items marked material are ones where a conclusion above moves to the other side of the price.
trailing_eps
flips up 25%
adjusted_pe
flips up 25%