Selected Stock Price Target News — July 2, 2026

Three companies reported earnings within about eighteen hours of each other this week. By Thursday morning, twelve different desks had reset their numbers on all three. Constellation Brands (STZ) beat estimates. Five analysts still cut or held their targets. Barclays’ Lauren Lieberman took hers to a new Street low. FactSet Research Systems (FDS) beat too. It drew four notes, three raises and one cut. Every rating stayed exactly where it started. General Mills (GIS) beat by the widest margin of the three. Three more desks nudged their numbers up without touching a single rating. Better numbers, same opinions, twelve times out of twelve.

Constellation Brands’ Beer Strength Splits Barclays’ Lieberman From Needham’s Pascarelli

Constellation Brands makes and imports Modelo, Corona, and other beer brands. It also runs a smaller wine and spirits business. The company closed its fiscal first quarter on June 30 with adjusted earnings of $3.43 a share. That beat the $3.19 Wall Street expected. Total revenue came in at $2.43 billion, down 3.3% from a year earlier. Nearly all of that decline traces to wine and spirits. Sales there dropped 47% to $149.2 million after last year’s brand divestitures gutted the unit. Beer is the business that actually drives the stock. It grew 2% to $2.28 billion on pricing gains and stronger shipments. Some flagship brands still showed softer depletion trends at retail. Management raised full year adjusted EPS guidance to $11.50 to $12.20, up from $11.10 to $11.80. The company also kept buying back stock, $324 million of it through June.

How The Five Desks Moved

Five desks weighed in over the next day, and they didn’t agree on much. Gerald Pascarelli at Needham reiterated his Buy. He left the target exactly where it was, $185. Dara Mohsenian at Morgan Stanley held his rating at Hold but cut his target to $158 from $183. He tied that move to a 12 times calendar 2027 earnings multiple. He also cited limited topline visibility from cyclical and structural pressure on beer demand. Lauren Lieberman at Barclays cut harder, down to $139 from $170. That’s a new low for the stock, an 18.24% reduction in one note.

At JPMorgan, Drew Levine trimmed his target to $165 from $169 and kept his Neutral rating. AnaChart doesn’t have a scored track record for him yet; his coverage here is too new. Kaumil Gajrawala at Jefferies cut to $147 from $157 and held his Hold. It’s a rating he’s carried on Constellation Brands since late June. AnaChart tracks 19 analysts on Constellation Brands with an average target of $173.54 ahead of today’s cuts. Pascarelli has landed just 1 of his last 17 Constellation Brands calls, a 5.88% hit rate. Mohsenian has done better here, 26 of 47. Lieberman sits at 8 of 38, 21.05%. Gajrawala’s STZ record sits at 11 of 34, 32.35%.

The Bull Case And The Bear Case

Pascarelli’s case rests on one number: the 2% volume and price gain in beer. His argument: in a tough consumer environment, that gain is exactly the kind of resilience that earns a premium multiple. The wine and spirits drag, in his view, disappears once the divested brands roll off the year-over-year comparison. Mohsenian, Lieberman, Levine and Gajrawala read the same quarter and landed somewhere else entirely.

Their worry isn’t this quarter. It’s the multiple. Beer is growing on price alone. Depletion trends are softening at some of Constellation’s biggest brands. Together, that doesn’t obviously support paying up for volume growth that hasn’t shown up yet. Four of the five cut their targets while leaving ratings untouched, Levine and Gajrawala included. That pairing, a cut with no downgrade, repeated four times in one morning. It often means a desk has gotten less sure of the number. It just stops short of calling the whole story broken.

Needham’s Buy is now the high number on the stock, $46 above Barclays’ new low. It comes from the analyst whose calls on this ticker have missed most often. Mohsenian, by contrast, has landed more of his Constellation Brands calls than he’s missed. Gajrawala’s own record on this name skews the same way Pascarelli’s does, more misses than hits. Everyone in this group agrees the quarter beat. The disagreement runs through the beer multiple. Does 2% growth on price justify the premium Constellation still commands? Or were Thursday’s targets the last easy raise before softer depletion trends catch up with the stock? Mohsenian, Lieberman, Levine and Gajrawala all just told their clients which side of that they’re on.

BMO’s Silber, Morgan Stanley’s Kaplan and Wells Fargo’s Haas Raise FactSet Targets While UBS’s Kramm Cuts After a Beat

FactSet provides financial data, analytics, and portfolio software to investment professionals. Ninety percent of its top 50 clients are now running four or more of the company’s AI tools. That adoption showed up directly in Thursday’s numbers. The company posted fiscal third-quarter revenue of $622.9 million, up 6.4% year over year. Adjusted earnings per share came in at $4.53 against a $4.45 estimate. Organic annual subscription value grew 7.1% to $2.48 billion.

More than a tenth of this quarter’s subscription growth came from AI related products. The company also expanded its portfolio analytics tool into a version built for agentic AI workflows. That kind of setup lets an AI assistant query portfolio data directly, instead of routing through a human analyst. The expansion cuts two ways. It’s new revenue today. It’s also a hint at the exact risk the Street keeps flagging. General purpose AI tools can now sit on top of raw financial data. That makes a subscription business built on being the trusted middle layer harder to defend.

Four Notes, Three Raises And A Cut

July 2 brought four separate FactSet notes, three pointing up and one down. None touched a rating. Jeffrey Silber at BMO Capital raised his target to $275 from $257, a 7% lift. He kept his Market Perform. Toni Kaplan at Morgan Stanley moved hers to $230 from $228, close to a rounding adjustment. She stayed at Equal-Weight. Jason Haas at Wells Fargo raised his to $210 from $200. He kept his Underweight, the most cautious rating of the four. Alex Kramm at UBS went the other way. He cut his target to $340 from $380, a 10.5% reduction. He held his Buy, the only bullish rating in the group.

AnaChart tracks 12 analysts on FactSet, averaging a $298 target. Silber has hit his price targets 71.8% of the time across 1,322 calls on 39 stocks. Kaplan’s overall number sits at 62.36% across 1,369 calls on 34 stocks. Haas has the smallest sample on this specific name but the sharpest one: 9 of his last 11 FactSet calls landed, 81.82%. Kramm’s FactSet record is close behind, 18 of his last 24 calls landed, 75%.

Where The Four Analysts Diverge

Silber and Kaplan’s math is fairly simple. A beat is a beat. A business that turns AI adoption into paying subscription growth is adapting, not just getting disrupted by it. Haas isn’t buying the adaptation story yet. His Underweight has stood since June of last year. One good quarter hasn’t changed the logic behind it. FactSet’s core product is still a subscription to curated financial data. The more capable general AI tools get, the less a client may pay FactSet a premium to package that data. Kramm sits apart from both camps. He’s the only Buy in the group, yet he’s the only one who cut his number today. He trimmed $40 off a target that was already the highest on the stock. The rating hasn’t budged, just the number.

Here’s what stands out: the analyst with the best recent record on this stock is also the most bearish. Haas’s higher target says the quarter earned a better number. His rating says he still wouldn’t call the stock a buy at that number. Kramm is the one desk actually rated Buy. He isn’t far behind Haas on accuracy here, and he’s the one who just took money off the table. Silber and Kaplan both track overall accuracy in the 60s and 70s. They’re willing to sit at Hold equivalents and wait for more evidence either way. Four analysts, one beat, four different ways of pricing what happens next.

General Mills Draws Three Price Target Raises After a Beat, Zero Rating Changes

General Mills makes and sells packaged food brands including Cheerios, Betty Crocker, and Blue Buffalo pet food. Ninety five cents. That’s the adjusted per share number General Mills put up for its fiscal fourth quarter. It reported the results July 1 before the opening bell. It beat a Wall Street estimate of 81 cents by roughly 17%. Revenue of $4.6 billion topped forecasts by $20 million. Adjusted operating profit rose 13%. Adjusted diluted earnings per share jumped 27% from a year earlier. That growth was helped by favorable trade expense comparisons and the timing of shipments. Ongoing savings from the company’s Holistic Margin Management program helped too. So did an extra week in the fiscal calendar. Management also announced a new target of $3 billion in cost savings by fiscal 2030. That’s about 16% of current annual revenue. A fresh round of brand investment across the portfolio came with it.

Three Raises, No Ratings Changed

By the next morning, three more targets were out on General Mills, each one higher. None of the ratings moved with them. Peter Galbo at BofA Securities lifted his number to $39 from $36 and held Neutral. Chris Carey at Wells Fargo moved to $33 from $30, still Underweight, the most bearish rating of the three. Scott Marks at Jefferies raised his target to $36 from $33 and kept Hold. It’s a rating he has carried on General Mills through every price target change on file for him.

AnaChart tracks 16 analysts on General Mills, averaging a $37.55 target. Galbo has hit his targets 62.04% of the time across 220 calls on 19 stocks. Carey sits at 55.6% across 423 calls on 10 stocks. AnaChart’s tracked record for Marks on this stock hasn’t produced a scored hit rate yet. It’s just a long run of Holds through several price target changes.

None of the three moved off a below Buy rating. The guidance explains why. General Mills projected fiscal 2027 adjusted earnings of $3.00 to $3.20 a share. The midpoint, $3.10, sits against a Street estimate of $3.13. That’s roughly in line with the estimate, not ahead of it. It confirms the quarter. It doesn’t say anything yet about the next one. Carey’s Underweight reflects a view that the cost savings plan and the brand spending are defensive moves, not growth drivers. Volumes in this category have been flat to down for years. Galbo and Marks read it as more neutral than negative. To them, it’s a management team that’s at least hitting its own numbers again after a rough stretch.

The Tight Target Band

The three targets landed in a tight band, $33 to $39, a six dollar spread across all three desks. A 17% earnings beat moved three price targets by a combined nine dollars, and zero ratings changed with them.

Twelve calls came out of three earnings reports in barely a day. They ran through Needham, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, JPMorgan, Jefferies, BMO Capital, Wells Fargo, UBS and BofA Securities. Not one of them changed a rating. AnaChart’s database holds 661,383 price targets and 759,654 ratings across 7,191 analysts. That’s split between 3,754 still active and 3,437 retired, covering 9,686 tickers going back 18 years. Want a closer look at how today’s targets stack up against each analyst’s full history? AnaChart’s analyst price target dataset breaks out the complete record behind every call.