Ford Motor Co — Key Metrics
3 years of history · ending 2025-12-31 · SEC EDGAR
Forensics
Three classic accounting-quality scores. F-Score (0-9, higher = better fundamentals); M-Score (>-1.78 flags possible manipulation); Z-Score (>2.99 = safe, <1.81 = distressed). Use together — single-score readings are noisy.
F-Score (Piotroski 0-9)
Z-Score (Altman; <1.81 = distress)
Per Share Metrics
Turnover & Efficiency Analysis (days)
Expense Ratios
Working Capital Analysis
Valuation Multiples
Cash-Flow Multiples
Enterprise Value Multiples
52-Week Range
Trailing Returns
ROIC vs WACC
Yields
Capital Deployment Yields
Liquidity & Leverage Ratios
Earnings Quality (OCF/NI · FCF/NI · Sloan Accruals)
Earnings Forecasts
Per-quarter consensus estimates + actuals + beat/miss surprise. Sourced from Finnhub (Wall Street consensus aggregation).
Source caveat: Finnhub free tier returns the consensus mean only — analyst high / low / dispersion + analyst counts require a paid plan. A "$5.00 consensus" line above could mean "20 analysts at exactly $5" (high conviction) or "10 at $5.50, 10 at $4.50" (split). Treat single-line consensus accordingly.
EPS — Consensus vs Actual
Revenue — Consensus vs Actual
Beat / Miss vs Estimate
Stock Price on Earnings Dates
Ford Motor Co — Effective Tax Rate ReconciliationNEW
Bridges from the federal statutory rate (21% post-TCJA) to the effective tax rate via the issuer's tax-note reconciliation lines. Sourced from EffectiveIncomeTaxRateReconciliation* flat CompanyFacts concepts. Conditional lines (R&D credits, FDII, SBC, valuation allowance, etc.) only render when the issuer discloses them. Persistent divergence between accrual tax expense and cash taxes paid is a leading signal for deferred-tax buildup.
Effective Rate Trend
| Reconciliation Line | FY2020 | FY2021 | FY2022 | FY2023 | FY2024 | FY2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federal Statutory Rate | 21.00% | 21.00% | 21.00% | 21.00% | 21.00% | 21.00% |
| State & Local Income Taxes | 8.90% | 0.50% | 2.30% | 1.90% | 1.70% | 2.70% |
| Foreign Rate Differential | -2.60% | 1.30% | -8.70% | -3.40% | 2.90% | — |
| Other Adjustments | 1.70% | -0.30% | 1.70% | -2.40% | 1.70% | — |
| R&D Tax Credits | — | — | — | — | — | -2.90% |
| Valuation Allowance Change | -108.80% | -4.70% | 6.20% | -0.70% | -1.00% | — |
| Tax Law Change | 1.50% | 1.10% | -2.00% | 0.10% | 0.40% | — |
| Effective Tax Rate | -14.30% | -0.70% | 28.60% | -9.10% | 18.50% | 31.00% |
Cash vs Accrual
| Item | FY2020 | FY2021 | FY2022 | FY2023 | FY2024 | FY2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Income Tax Expense (Accrual) | $160.0M | −$130.0M | −$864.0M | −$362.0M | $1.34B | −$3.67B |
| Income Taxes Paid (Cash) | $421.0M | $568.0M | $801.0M | $1.03B | $1.22B | $622.0M |
Ford Motor Co — Litigation CasesNEW
Per-case litigation disclosures sourced from us-gaap:LossContingenciesByNatureOfContingencyAxis dimensional XBRL. Coverage is sparse — most filers aggregate at the parent level (JNJ talc, PFE opioid) — but high-value when per-case disclosure exists. Loss estimate is either a single point or a low/high range, depending on how the issuer values the contingency.
As of 2025-12-31
| Case | Estimated Loss | Damages Sought | Settlement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Field Service Actions And Customer Service Actions | $1.70B | — | — |
Ford Motor Co — RestructuringNEW
Per-category restructuring disclosures sourced from us-gaap:RestructuringCostAndReserveAxis dimensional XBRL. Negative charges indicate reversals of prior accruals (a sign the original estimate was too aggressive — flattering current-period earnings).
As of 2025-12-31
| Category | Class | P&L Charge | Cash Paid | Reserve Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pension Costs | Other | +$126M | — | — |