Albemarle Corporation

ALB Basic Materials · Specialty Chemicals
Delayed 15 min
Last close
$129.72
Jun 29, 2026
52-week range
$60.64 — $221.00
-41% from high
Market cap
15.3B
Diluted basis
Dividend yield
121.0%
P/E
Trailing
Filing.fyi verdict · Jun 29, 2026

Fairly valued.

Fairly Valued (Neutral) — Filing.fyi's reading derived from the latest 10-K and forensic scores.

Neutral
RED DEEP / 100
Composite Health
AI synthesis · grounded in this ticker's SEC filings · drag to highlight, releases the composer

What the filing actually says.

AI · wry-editorial preset

Albemarle Corporation’s most recent filing, as presented for this forensic reading, offers a unique challenge: the absence of specific quantitative metrics and textual excerpts. A comprehensive forensic accounting review typically begins with an examination of the filing’s content, focusing on disclosures and financial statements that inform various analytical models. However, for this particular analysis, the foundational data points that underpin such an examination are not available, limiting the immediate insights derived from the filing itself.

The standard suite of forensic scores, designed to flag potential accounting anomalies or financial distress, remains uncalculated for this reading. Beneish’s M-Score, a 1999 eight-ratio earnings-manipulation detector, is not available. Similarly, Altman’s Z″, a 1968 bankruptcy-distress index, is not available. Piotroski’s F-Score, a 9-point fundamental strength scan, is also not available, as is the Fog Index — a readability score where 12 equals newspaper and 18+ suggests obfuscation. The absence of these computed values means the filing cannot, at this juncture, signal elevated manipulation risk, financial distress, or fundamental weakness through these established frameworks.

Furthermore, a detailed examination of Item 7 (MD&A) and Item 1A (Risk Factors) is not possible, as no excerpts from these critical sections were provided for this reading. The MD&A (Management’s Discussion and Analysis) typically offers management’s perspective on the company’s financial condition and results of operations, while Item 1A outlines the most significant risks to the business. Without these textual insights, the forensic accountant lacks direct access to management’s narrative and the company’s self-identified vulnerabilities, which are crucial for contextualizing any quantitative findings.

This reading, therefore, cannot offer a conclusive forensic assessment of Albemarle’s filing. The limitations stem directly from the lack of available data points, both quantitative and qualitative, within the provided prompt. A complete forensic analysis would necessitate access to the full financial statements, footnotes, and the entirety of the MD&A and risk factor sections to calculate the aforementioned scores and interpret the company’s disclosures. Without these, any judgment on the security’s underlying financial health remains unanchored to the filing itself.

Member feature · Custom Q&A
Ask anything about ALB's filings.
Plain-English answer, cited from the company's own 10-K and recent 10-Qs. No buy/sell advice.
Ask a question →
Further reading · curated for this filing

If this case caught your eye

Affiliate links — Filing.fyi earns a commission on Amazon purchases. We pick the books first, attach the link second.

Financial Shenanigans

Howard M. Schilit

Schilit's framework for the seven shenanigan types is the standard reference for the kind of MD&A pattern-matching this site does.

View on Amazon →

The Interpretation of Financial Statements

Benjamin Graham

The original — and still the clearest — explanation of why working-capital trends matter more than headline earnings.

View on Amazon →
Quality of Earnings

Quality of Earnings

Thornton L. O'glove

Out of print, expensive, worth it. The chapter on receivables-vs-revenue divergence applies almost word-for-word to most distressed filings.

View on Amazon →