For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Solstice Advanced Materials Inc. (SOLS) — 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 2026-09-07): Designation Low · Gem Score -50 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality -15 · Value -73 · Sentiment -50 (timing only, not weighted)
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.
Solstice Advanced Materials Inc.
SOLS NASDAQSolstice Advanced Materials Inc. is a specialty chemicals and advanced materials company that provides high-performance materials and chemical solutions to industrial and technology-driven end markets worldwide. The business is organized into two main segments: Refrigerants & Applied Solutions and Electronic & Specialty Materials, reflecting its focus on both thermal management and advanced industrial materials. In refrigerants and applied solutions, Solstice Advanced Materials offers low global warming potential refrigerants, blowing agents, solvents, aerosol propellants, and pharmaceutical packaging materials used in HVAC/R systems, automotive applications, building insulation, appliances, and healthcare. The electronic and specialty materials segment supplies semiconductor materials, sputtering targets, protective and lightweight high-strength fibers, and high-purity life science chemicals serving semiconductor manufacturing, defense, pharmaceuticals, construction, and laboratory life sciences. The company also operates a uranium conversion business in the United States, supporting the nuclear power sector. Founded in 2025 and headquartered in Morris Plains, New Jersey, Solstice Advanced Materials Inc. plays a significant role in enabling performance, efficiency, and sustainability across multiple critical industrial and technology markets.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 1.49
Total Equity: $1.38B
Shares: 158,900,000
Total Debt: $1.97B
Cash: $534.00M
EBITDA: $756.00M
Total Debt: $1.97B
Cash: $534.00M
Revenue: $3.89B
Revenue: $3.89B
Revenue: $3.89B
Total Equity: $1.38B
Tax Rate: 56.0%
Equity: $1.38B
Total Debt: $1.97B
Cash: $534.00M
Current Liabilities: $1.71B
Long-Term Debt: $1.97B
Total Debt: $1.97B
Total Equity: $1.38B
Shares: 158,900,000
Shares: 158,900,000
CapEx: -$336.00M
Shares: 158,900,000
Stock Price: $62.65
Net Income: $237.00M
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:07pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.6B | $3.8B | $3.9B |
| Cost of Revenue | $2.4B | $2.5B | $2.6B |
| Gross Profit | $1.3B | $1.3B | $1.3B |
| Operating Expenses | $459.0M | $475.0M | $518.0M |
| Operating Income | $824.0M | $831.0M | $732.0M |
| Net Income | $621.0M | $594.0M | $237.0M |
| EBITDA | $872.0M | $870.0M | $756.0M |
| EPS | $3.91 | $3.74 | $1.49 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $3.91 | $3.74 | $1.49 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:37am (22d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | — | — | $661.0M | $534.0M |
| Total Current Assets | — | — | $1.9B | $2.4B |
| Total Assets | — | — | $5.0B | $5.7B |
| Current Liabilities | — | — | $1.1B | $1.7B |
| Long-Term Debt | — | — | $0 | $2.0B |
| Total Liabilities | — | — | $1.8B | $4.3B |
| Total Equity | $2.7B | $3.0B | $3.2B | $1.4B |
| Retained Earnings | — | — | $0 | $41.0M |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:07pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $760.0M | $842.0M | $455.0M |
| Capital Expenditure | -$299.0M | -$296.0M | -$336.0M |
| Free Cash Flow | $461.0M | $546.0M | $119.0M |
| Acquisitions (net) | — | — | — |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $0 | $0 | $2.0B |
| Dividends Paid | $0 | $0 | -$1.5B |
| Stock Buybacks | — | — | — |
| Net Change in Cash | $57.0M | $55.0M | -$126.0M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:07pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +3.3% | +3.1% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +1.8% | -4.3% |
| Operating Income Growth | +0.8% | -11.9% |
| Net Income Growth | -4.3% | -60.1% |
| EBITDA Growth | -0.2% | -13.1% |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:37am (22d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-27 | $0.08 | — | — | — |
| 2026-05-27 | $0.08 | — | — | — |
| 2026-02-24 | $0.08 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Not computed yetNarrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-17 16:28The 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
The raw numbers tell a more nuanced story than the synthesis verdict admits. Quarterly revenue is actually accelerating: $907M → $897M → $969M → $991M, with the most recent quarter up 9.3% YoY. But earnings are chaotic — Q3 2025 posted a $35M loss, and full-year 2025 NI collapsed 60% to $237M from $594M. Gross margin fell from 34.7% (2023) to 32.2% (2025), while operating margin dropped from 22.6% to 18.8%. This isn't a semiconductor cycle story alone — it's margin compression on a modestly growing top line, which is a worse setup than pure cyclicality. The Q1 2026 rebound to 8.6% net margin is nowhere near the 16.8% posted just 18 months earlier, so "trough earnings snap back" needs to prove itself.
The balance sheet deserves more scrutiny than anyone gave it. Debt/equity of 1.43, $1.97B total debt against $534M cash and only $119M FCF in 2025 — that's 16.5x debt/FCF, which is uncomfortable for a "mature earner" throwing off declining cash. Capex of $336M against $455M OCF means the business is capital-hungry relative to its cash generation, and the FCF CAGR of -49% suggests either working capital deterioration or a real step-down in cash conversion. ROIC of 11.5% is fine but not moat-caliber; ROA of 4.2% on a levered balance sheet is thin. The 42x PE isn't looking through a trough — it's looking through a permanently impaired earnings base to a recovery that hasn't been proven.
Where I partially dissent from the synthesis: the $31.73 signal-adjusted fair value feels too punitive. It appears to extrapolate the 2025 collapse forward. If 2024's $594M NI is even directionally repeatable at, say, $450-500M normalized, a 20x multiple gets you $60-70/share — roughly the current price. The narrative layer nails it: the stock is priced as strategic infrastructure, not commodity specialty chems. But the market-forces "value trap / catastrophic displacement" language is overwrought — Q1 2026's $991M revenue and return to profitability aren't consistent with catastrophic displacement. This looks more like a normal cyclical trough with margin pressure, not a structural break. The contrarian argument the models missed: revenue confidence is actually high and growing sequentially, and if the Electronics Materials segment is genuinely levered to sub-3nm precursors, the operating leverage on the recovery could surprise. But — and this matters — insider activity shows only option exercises and tiny 2-share awards, zero open-market buying. If insiders believed in the recovery narrative at $62, someone would be adding.
Data quality concerns: the insider transactions have "?" for the filer identity, which is unusable — I can't tell if these are executives or directors, or whether the F-InKind is tax withholding vs a real sale. The 6.3x payout ratio is nonsense on 2025's compressed earnings and shouldn't be cited as meaningful. Missing 2022 and 2021 comparables prevent me from anchoring to a real through-cycle earnings baseline — this is the single biggest gap. Without 5+ years of data, calling "normalized earnings" is guesswork. I agree with the synthesis direction (overvalued) but not the magnitude. Fair value is closer to $50-55, not $32. The $62.65 price embeds a full V-shaped recovery to 2024 profitability plus a strategic-materials premium; both could be right, but you're not being paid to take that bet here. The 3.2% revenue CAGR does not support a 42x PE even if margins normalize, and the balance sheet gives no cushion if the recovery slips. I'd want either $50 entry or two clean quarters of margin expansion (op margin back above 20%) before committing capital. Partial dissent — same direction, less extreme.
GPT Reading
The stock looks expensive for what is, in the numbers, a low-growth cyclical materials business with sharply impaired earnings power. Revenue has barely moved from $3.65B in 2023 to $3.89B in 2025, a 3% CAGR, yet net income has fallen from $621M to $237M over the same span, taking net margin from 17.0% to 6.1%. That is not a temporary blip you can casually wave through when the balance sheet is also carrying $1.97B of debt against just $534M of cash and only $1.38B of equity. The market is capitalizing the company at nearly $10B, or 2.6x sales, 15.1x EBITDA, 7.2x book, and 42x depressed earnings, which only makes sense if 2025 is close to trough and normalized earnings snap back dramatically. I do not see enough evidence of that snapback in the actual operating pattern.
The quarterly data actually reinforces the concern. Yes, the latest quarter improved to $991M of revenue and $85M of net income, versus $969M and a $35M loss in the prior reported quarter. But compared with the stronger periods, profitability is still much weaker: the latest 8.6% net margin is roughly half the 16.8% margin posted in 2024-09 and well below the 14.9% in 2025-03. In other words, revenue has remained in a narrow $897M-$991M band while earnings have swung violently from $152M profit to a $35M loss and back to just $85M. That says pricing, mix, utilization, or cost absorption is unstable. If the business really had the kind of moat implied by the valuation and narrative, I would expect a much steadier conversion of revenue into profit. Instead, gross profit fell from $1.31B in 2024 to $1.25B in 2025 despite higher sales, and operating income dropped from $831M to $732M, showing real margin compression before you even get below the line.
Cash flow makes the equity case harder, not easier. Operating cash flow of $455M against net income of $237M is respectable, but free cash flow of only $119M after $336M of capex is thin for a $9.95B market cap, a roughly 1.2% FCF yield. That would be acceptable for a business compounding at 15%-20% with pristine balance sheet optionality; it is not acceptable for a company growing low single digits while earnings are down more than 60% year over year and debt-to-equity sits at 1.43x. The tiny dividend yield of 0.36% offers no support. On a practical basis, investors today are paying for a return to something like $500M-$600M of earnings power. Even if Solstice can recover to, say, $450M of net income, the stock would still be at about 22x that normalized figure, which is full for a cyclical specialty materials name with visible margin volatility. My base case is that fair value is materially lower, around $45-$50, unless the company can demonstrate that 2025 was an aberration rather than a reset to structurally lower profitability.
The best case against my view is straightforward and not trivial: earnings may indeed have troughed. Annual operating income of $732M is still solid, ROIC of 11.5% is not broken, the latest quarter showed revenue at a new high of $991M, and the swing from a $35M loss to an $85M profit in two quarters could indicate that under-absorption and temporary dislocations are already fading. If investors are right that the company’s electronics materials franchise is more mission-critical than the income statement currently shows, then 2025’s 6.1% net margin may be a trough distortion rather than a normalized state. On that view, a 2.9x EV/revenue multiple is not crazy because the business could be entering a margin recovery while maintaining stable top-line growth. I weigh that less heavily because the evidence of recovery is incomplete: one quarter at 8.6% margin is not proof of restored earnings power when the business used to convert similar revenue levels at 15%-17% net margins.
What would change my mind is very specific. If the next two quarters hold revenue around or above $1.0B while net margin returns sustainably to at least 12%-14%, that would imply annualized earnings power back in the $480M-$560M range and would support today’s valuation much better. I would also want to see free cash flow move decisively above $300M annually without a further increase in leverage, proving the capex burden is earning its keep. Absent that, the stock is being priced on memory and narrative rather than current economics.
Grok Reading
The numbers describe a mature specialty-materials franchise whose top line is still inching forward while profitability and cash generation have broken. Revenue climbed from $3.65B in 2023 to $3.77B in 2024 to $3.89B in 2025—a 3.2% CAGR that continued into the March 2026 quarter at $991M—yet net income collapsed from $621M to $594M to $237M and free cash flow printed only $119M after $336M of capex. Gross margin compressed from roughly 35% to 32%, operating income fell from $831M to $732M, and the September 2025 quarter actually lost $35M before a partial rebound to $85M (8.6% net margin) in the latest period. Against a $9.95B equity value and roughly $1.44B of net debt, that leaves a 1.2% FCF yield, a 42× trailing P/E on trough earnings, and a balance sheet carrying 1.43× debt-to-equity with only a 1.39 current ratio. The slow revenue grind and still-respectable 18.8% operating margin show the core business is intact; the simultaneous freefall in earnings and cash conversion shows the earnings power the market is underwriting simply is not present today.
What the market is clearly doing is looking through the trough. At $62.65 the stock embeds either a swift return to the $450–500M+ net-income zone of 2023–24 or a structural re-rating that treats Solstice as non-fungible semiconductor-and-refrigerant infrastructure. EV/EBITDA of 15× and EV/revenue of 2.9× are not grotesque if that normalization arrives, but they are expensive insurance when earnings CAGR is –38%, FCF CAGR is –49%, and ROIC has compressed to 11.5%. The quantitative fair-value cluster around $32–38 is directionally consistent with capitalized current cash flows; the $25–30 gap to the tape is almost pure narrative premium for “chokepoint materials” and regulatory moats.
The strongest counter-argument is that the March 2026 quarter already shows sequential healing—revenue at a new high, net income back in the black—and that a semi up-cycle plus tightening refrigerant rules could restore both volume and mix faster than a simple mean-reversion model assumes. Operating leverage on a $3.9B revenue base is real: every 200 bp of gross-margin recovery is worth roughly $80M of incremental operating profit before tax. EV/EBITDA of 15× would look ordinary, even cheap, if EBITDA re-accelerates with the cycle, and the 2.6× sales multiple is not demanding for a materials name with genuine IP in next-gen chemistries. A bull can therefore claim the 42× trailing multiple is an optical artifact of a one-year earnings hole rather than a permanent overvaluation.
I weigh that case second because the leverage and cash conversion still look stretched even in recovery scenarios, and three years of declining absolute profits plus heavy capex have not yet demonstrated the pricing power the monopoly narrative requires. Asian competition and customer dual-sourcing remain live risks that the storytellers underweight. I would flip to neutral or constructive if two consecutive quarters deliver net income above $120M (implying a run-rate above $480M) with free cash flow re-accelerating through $300M annualized and gross margin reclaiming 34%+, or if management provides hard evidence that Electronic Materials is taking share at expanding rather than contracting incremental margins.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Solstice looks like a recently separated specialty/advanced materials unit (share count essentially frozen at ~158.7M across all three years suggests spin-off share issuance rather than organic history). Revenue is grinding higher (3.65B to 3.77B to 3.89B, ~3% CAGR) but profitability is going the wrong way fast: gross margin slipped from 35.2% to 32.2%, operating margin collapsed from 22.6% to 18.8%, net income was cut nearly in two (621M to 237M), and FCF fell from 461M to 119M in a single year. That is a meaningful step-down, not noise. Earnings quality itself is clean: accruals -4.4% of assets, OCF/NI of 1.52x, Beneish M of -2.85, and no dilution (SBC only 0.7% of revenue, diluted CAGR 0.1%) — the reported numbers appear real, the problem is the underlying economics. Balance sheet is the swing factor. Net cash is -1.44B against only 534M of liquid cash, and FCF of 119M would take over a decade to retire that debt at current run-rate. Altman Z of 2.65 (grey zone) confirms it is neither distressed nor comfortable. With margins compressing and FCF down 78% year-over-year, debt service capacity is narrowing right when it matters most. Insider tape shows only routine awards, option exercises, and tax withholdings — no open-market P or S transactions, so no directional signal either way from management.
Verify before trusting this (6)
- Cause of 2025 gross margin decline (input costs, mix, one-time spin/separation costs, or structural pricing pressure)
- Debt maturity schedule and covenants on the ~1.97B gross debt implied by net debt figure
- Whether 2025 numbers include stranded costs, separation charges, or standalone-company overhead uplift from the spin
- Customer and end-market concentration in advanced materials segments
- Capex trajectory and whether the FCF drop reflects growth investment or margin loss
- Segment-level profitability to identify which product lines drove the deleverage
Three independent methods cluster tightly: DCF $39.81, EPV floor $38.76, anchored P/E $32.58, composite $37.74, signal-adjusted $31.73. Against a $62.65 price that is a ~40-50% premium to deserved value with implied downside near 40%. The tight clustering across DCF, EPV and P/E anchors makes this less likely to be a runaway-method artifact and more likely a real gap. The bull case requires believing SOLS is a monopoly toll on next-gen refrigerants and sub-3nm precursors; the numbers (60% net income decline, 78% FCF collapse, tripled net debt post-spin, low double-digit margins) look like a mature specialty chemicals company, not a monopoly. Quality is Mixed, not Wide-Moat, so the deserved value should not be marked up meaningfully above the composite. Even generously crediting spin-related one-offs and awarding a full quality premium, deserved value lands in the $40-45 range, still ~30% below the tape. This is priced for a narrative that the fundamentals have not yet earned.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Magnitude of one-time separation/spin costs in 2025 and normalized run-rate margins
- Segment disclosure on refrigerants vs semiconductor precursors - growth and pricing power in each
- Management guidance on deleveraging path and free cash flow conversion
- Contract structure with leading-edge foundries - are precursors sole-sourced or dual-sourced
- Capex outlook for next-gen refrigerant capacity
The macro tape is mildly supportive (VIX 14.3, S&P near highs, risk-on regime holding 10 days), which normally lifts story-stocks like SOLS. But this name is not participating: the last identifiable catalyst was a 15% single-day drawdown on the Element Solutions acquisition, and 3-year relative performance is deeply negative with D/E ballooning from 0 to 1.43. That combination - a leveraging balance sheet and a large, poorly-received M&A - is exactly the setup that a benign tape does NOT rescue. Sentiment on this specific ticker is skeptical, not euphoric. The active narrative is a platform-monopoly / 'last defensible supplier' story with strong intensity but only moderate durability and medium cult - meaning the bull case is loud but not fanatical, and it is now under pressure from a bear frame (mature specialty chemical, Asian competition, cyclical chip demand) that the acquisition arguably validates. With price at roughly 2x the DCF anchor, the story needs constant feeding; a dilutive deal starves it. Higher rates (10y 4.63%) and a stretched market PE add a mild valuation-compression headwind that lands harder on premium-multiple narrative names like this one.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Analyst target revisions post-Element Solutions deal - are estimates being cut or reframed
- Any signs the acquisition narrative is being re-underwritten as 'scale platform' rather than 'dilution'
- Semi capex commentary from ASML/TSMC/AMAT that could reignite the precursor story
- Whether SOLS breaks below post-deal lows on volume - a sign the narrative is actively fading
Two independent forces work in Solstice's favor and neither is narrative: environmental legislation is deleting legacy fluorochemistry on a fixed timetable, and leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing is consuming more specialty chemistry per wafer. Both are real, both are company-specific through qualified positions. What the world does not supply is a mechanism for 20%+ compounding: refrigerant conversion is a one-time re-pricing of an installed base, and the electronics slice is too small to carry the whole mix. Meanwhile the global fluorochemicals supply chain is adding non-Western capacity, which historically converts regulatory scarcity rents into commodity pricing within a few years of patent lapse. Macro headwinds (10y 4.63) matter mainly through auto/HVAC builds and the interest line on a freshly levered standalone balance sheet.
Prediction unavailable. valuation-synthesis has no result for SOLS — the prediction needs its fair-value anchors.