Build a Debt-and-Lease Comparability Review With Claude and FMP MCP
Two companies can report "total debt" and mean different things. One counts finance lease liabilities inside its long-term debt line; another lists them on their own row. Operating leases usually sit outside debt altogether, but a data feed may fold them back in. Compare the two headline numbers without checking the parts, and the comparison measures accounting presentation as much as borrowing, which is a risk in any peer-group benchmark of standardized ratios.
This review takes Target Corporation (TGT) for its fiscal year ended February 1, 2025 and Walmart Inc. (WMT) for its fiscal year ended January 31, 2025. Claude first records the debt and lease fields in FMP's standardized balance sheets, then reads each 10-K's balance sheet and debt and lease notes, and builds a component inventory that shows what each company's reported debt contains. Both companies have since filed a later 10-K; the same two prompts apply to any year by changing the period end and the year parameter.
The output is a component review: each obligation's amount, its definition in the filing, whether reported debt already includes it, the proposed treatment, the supporting disclosure and any double-counting concern. A second table rates each reconciled component for comparability, separately from how the filing presents it, and says whether a limitation affects only that comparison or also the leverage measure that follows. The review does not score refinancing risk, assess maturities or rank the two companies, and it covers recognized borrowings and lease liabilities only.
Key takeaways
- Target's "long-term debt and other borrowings" already contains $2,161 million of finance lease liabilities, while Walmart reports its $6,723 million of finance lease obligations on separate lines. FMP's capitalLeaseObligations field holds Target's operating leases only, but Walmart's operating and finance leases together.
- Rebuilt from the filings, borrowings excluding all leases are $13,779 million for Target and $39,067 million for Walmart. Subtracting FMP's lease field from its total debt gives different answers for the two companies, so that figure is not comparable.
- Where a filing places a component is a presentation difference, settled by separating the components. Comparability is rated afterward, on the reconciled components, and not on individual instrument rows.
- Walmart's borrowings include an aggregate of negative $847 million that the filing describes but does not break down. The leverage measure can use it as reported. It limits component-level comparison without blocking the calculation.
- Matching FMP's total debt shows that the identified borrowings and recognized lease liabilities add up and are not counted twice. It does not show that every obligation of either company is in the review: the filings disclose supplier finance programs of $3,666 million at Target and $5,725 million at Walmart, among other items, outside it.
Building the component review
Target and Walmart make a useful pair because they run similar businesses, close their fiscal years a day apart, and present leases in opposite ways. Their fiscal-year labels differ, Target calling the year fiscal 2024 and Walmart calling it fiscal 2025, a labeling gap of the kind covered in aligning earnings dates, fiscal quarters and reported results. The review compares period ends, not labels.
Component definitions
|
Component |
Definition used |
Where it usually appears |
|---|---|---|
|
Borrowings |
Notes, debentures, commercial paper and credit-line draws, at carrying value |
Debt lines and the debt note |
|
Carrying adjustments |
Hedge valuation adjustments, discounts and deferred loan costs that change the carrying value of borrowings |
Debt note |
|
Finance lease liabilities |
Present value of finance lease payments |
Inside debt for some companies, on separate lines for others |
|
Operating lease liabilities |
Present value of operating lease payments |
Separate liability lines or other current liabilities |
Each component keeps the amount and caption the filing uses. Current and noncurrent portions are added only after confirming both belong to the same component. Borrowings at carrying value, in the rest of this article, means borrowings plus carrying adjustments and excludes every lease.
Inclusion test and treatment
A component is "included in reported debt" only when the filing places it inside a line or subtotal the company presents as debt. The treatment then follows one rule: a component already included is never added a second time, and a component outside reported debt is added only in a measure that names it. This is a treatment for these two companies, not a universal lease-adjusted debt formula.
Some filings report several items in one line, as Walmart's "total other" does. An aggregate that the filing presents as part of borrowings at carrying value is used as reported, and the items inside it are not attributed to any one of them.
Presentation and comparability
The review keeps two questions apart.
- Presentation difference: where each filing places a component, inside or outside reported debt. Target's finance leases sit inside its debt lines and Walmart's sit on separate lines. This is recorded and resolved by the treatment rule. It is not itself rated.
- Comparability after reconciliation: whether, once each company's amount is separated and the treatment rule applied, the two amounts mean the same thing and cover the same obligations.
Comparability is rated on reconciled components: borrowings at carrying value, finance lease liabilities and operating lease liabilities, plus the two FMP-derived figures that users tend to rely on. Individual instrument rows, such as Target's notes and debentures or Walmart's unsecured fixed-rate debt, are inputs to the borrowings component and are not rated, because the instruments each company lists differ. Coverage means the set of instruments or obligations an amount includes.
|
Status |
Rule |
|---|---|
|
Comparable after reconciliation |
Same definition and same coverage at both companies once the component is separated, and a separately disclosed amount (a balance-sheet line or a note amount) at both |
|
Comparable with limits |
Same definition, but at least one company reports the component together with other items in an aggregate |
|
Not comparable |
The field or derived figure means different things at the two companies |
|
Unavailable |
Not separately disclosed; never recorded as zero |
A reported zero, such as a statement that no commercial paper was outstanding, is kept as zero. A component the filing does not break out is Unavailable. These statuses are screening labels set for this review.
The leverage measure
|
Measure |
Calculation |
Where it is used |
Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Debt and lease liabilities to equity |
(Borrowings + carrying adjustments + finance lease liabilities + operating lease liabilities) ÷ total shareholders' equity including nonredeemable noncontrolling interest |
Prompt 2, Table 6 |
One leverage view built from components defined the same way at both companies |
Two tests decide whether the measure is calculated.
- Numerator test: every part is either a separately disclosed amount (a balance-sheet line or a note amount) or an aggregate that the filing presents as part of borrowings at carrying value. An aggregate is used as reported.
- Denominator test: total equity comes from the balance sheet, including nonredeemable noncontrolling interest and excluding redeemable noncontrolling interest, for the same consolidated group as the numerator. FMP's totalEquity is used only if it equals that figure.
The support result has three forms. Supported with all parts separately disclosed means no aggregate is used. Supported with a reported aggregate means an aggregate is used, and the result names it and lists the component-level conclusions that stay unavailable. Not calculated means a test failed, with the reason. Income-statement measures such as debt to EBITDA are left out, so no income statement is used.
What a limitation prevents
|
Limitation |
Prevents |
Does not prevent |
|---|---|---|
|
An aggregate inside borrowings that the filing does not break down, such as Walmart's total other |
Comparing the items inside it, such as carrying adjustments, secured debt or foreign-held debt |
The leverage measure, because the filing presents the aggregate as part of borrowings at carrying value |
|
Different instrument coverage between companies |
Rating individual instrument rows |
Rating the reconciled borrowings component and calculating the measure |
|
An FMP field that holds different obligations at each company |
Using that field or any figure derived from it |
Using the filing lines instead |
|
FMP equity that includes items the balance sheet places outside equity |
Using FMP's totalEquity |
The measure, if the balance sheet gives the correct figure |
|
A numerator part that is Unavailable or cannot be traced to filing lines |
The leverage measure |
Not applicable |
|
An aggregate not stated to be part of borrowings or leases |
The leverage measure |
Not applicable |
|
No filing figure for the denominator on the same consolidated group |
The leverage measure |
Not applicable |
|
A lease note and the balance sheet disagreeing on a total, with no explanation |
The leverage measure |
Not applicable |
What the reconciliation covers
When the identified components add up to FMP's totalDebt, the review has shown two things: the borrowings, finance lease liabilities and operating lease liabilities recognized on the balance sheet account for the standardized total, and no component is counted twice. It does not show that the review captures every obligation of either company. The filings disclose other obligations that sit outside both reported debt and the recognized lease lines, and Prompt 2 lists them without adding them to any measure.
Data inputs and access through FMP MCP
The structured values come from FMP's Balance Sheet Statement API, part of the financial statements dataset. FMP's notes on how statements are parsed describe how its standardized fields are filled. The filing excerpts come from the Financial Reports Form 10-K JSON API, which returns each 10-K's statements and notes as structured text.
|
Claude connector tool / operation and parameters |
Fields or sections used |
Feeds |
|---|---|---|
|
statements / balance-sheet-statement symbol=TGT and WMT, period=annual, limit=2 |
shortTermDebt, longTermDebt, capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent, capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent, capitalLeaseObligations, totalDebt, totalEquity, filingDate |
Tables 1 and 2 |
|
statements / financial-reports-form-10-k-json symbol=TGT, year=2024, period=FY |
Balance sheet; Commercial Paper and Long-Term Debt note; Leases note; commitments and supplier finance notes |
Tables 3 to 7 |
|
statements / financial-reports-form-10-k-json symbol=WMT, year=2025, period=FY |
Balance sheet; Short-term Borrowings and Long-term Debt note; Leases note; Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (supplier finance, indemnification) |
Tables 3 to 7 |
For readers who want to confirm a figure in the documents themselves, the filings are Target's 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 1, 2025 and Walmart's 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2025, both Item 8. The date each 10-K became public is recorded but not tested; that question belongs to the as-of-date fundamental screen workflow.
All amounts are in USD millions and cover each company's consolidated balance sheet. Liabilities are shown as positive amounts, as both filings present them. Two components are negative, Target's swap valuation adjustments and Walmart's total other in its debt note, and both keep their sign.
Accessing the data through Claude
Connect the FMP MCP server through Claude's Settings, Connectors, Add custom connector, using this URL with your API key in place of YOUR_FMP_API_KEY:
|
https://financialmodelingprep.com/mcp?apikey=YOUR_FMP_API_KEY |
Every source the prompts use comes through FMP, so both run in one new conversation with web search off.
The run shown below took place on November 6, 2026, in a single Claude conversation.
Running the review in Claude
The review uses two prompts so that structured FMP responses and filing excerpts never mix in one table. Prompt 1 records what FMP's standardized balance sheet says. Prompt 2 reads the filings and decides what each FMP field actually contains. A later run applies the same rules, but FMP's records can change, so its tables can differ.
Prompt 1: Record FMP's standardized debt fields
|
Using Financial Modeling Prep through the connected FMP MCP server, start a debt-and-lease comparability review for Target Corporation (TGT), fiscal year ended February 1, 2025, and Walmart Inc. (WMT), fiscal year ended January 31, 2025. Objective Record FMP's standardized debt and lease fields for both companies. Do not interpret what each field contains yet. Data rules - Use only the FMP statements tool, endpoint balance-sheet-statement, period annual, limit 2. If the target period is not returned, raise the limit until it is. - Do not use filings or web search in this step. - Retry a failed request once; report Unavailable if still missing. Never record a missing field as zero. Steps 1. For each company, record date, fiscalYear, filingDate, shortTermDebt, longTermDebt, capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent, capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent, capitalLeaseObligations, totalDebt and totalEquity, in USD millions. 2. Test: shortTermDebt + longTermDebt + capitalLeaseObligations = totalDebt. 3. Test: capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent + capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent = capitalLeaseObligations. Output Start with a short run summary: run date, companies, periods, operations called and any data limitation. Table 1: Field | TGT | WMT Table 2: Test | TGT result | WMT result After the tables, state in one sentence what the tests show. Do not say what type of lease the capitalLeaseObligations fields contain. |
What Prompt 1 returned
Claude's run summary recorded the run date (November 6, 2026) and the two operations called: balance-sheet-statement, annual, limit 2, once per symbol. Every requested field was returned for both target periods, so it reported no data limitation. Amounts are converted from whole dollars to USD millions.
Table 1. FMP standardized fields (USD millions)
|
Field |
TGT |
WMT |
|---|---|---|
|
date |
2025-02-01 |
2025-01-31 |
|
fiscalYear |
2024 |
2025 |
|
filingDate |
2025-03-12 |
2025-03-14 |
|
shortTermDebt |
1,636 |
5,666 |
|
longTermDebt |
14,304 |
33,401 |
|
capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent |
353 |
2,299 |
|
capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent |
3,582 |
18,748 |
|
capitalLeaseObligations |
3,935 |
21,047 |
|
totalDebt |
19,875 |
60,114 |
|
totalEquity |
14,666 |
97,692 |
Table 2. Arithmetic tests (USD millions)
|
Test |
TGT result |
WMT result |
|---|---|---|
|
shortTermDebt + longTermDebt + capitalLeaseObligations = totalDebt |
1,636 + 14,304 + 3,935 = 19,875 vs 19,875. Pass, difference 0 |
5,666 + 33,401 + 21,047 = 60,114 vs 60,114. Pass, difference 0 |
|
capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent + capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent = capitalLeaseObligations |
353 + 3,582 = 3,935 vs 3,935. Pass, difference 0 |
2,299 + 18,748 = 21,047 vs 21,047. Pass, difference 0 |
Claude's closing sentence: for both companies, totalDebt equals the sum of short-term debt, long-term debt and capitalLeaseObligations, and capitalLeaseObligations equals the sum of its current and non-current parts, so the fields are internally consistent. The tests say nothing yet about what each field contains or whether the two companies' figures are comparable.
It also noted two points for the next step without interpreting them. The fiscalYear labels differ by one year (Target 2024, Walmart 2025) although the period ends are one day apart. And Walmart's totalEquity of 97,692 differs from its totalStockholdersEquity of 91,013, while Target's two fields are equal at 14,666.
Prompt 2: Read the filings and build the component review
Prompt 2 reads each 10-K, records every debt and lease component under its own caption, maps each FMP field to the filing lines behind it, rates the reconciled components, and tests the leverage measure. The inclusion rule, statuses, support tests and limitation levels from the framework are written into it, so Claude applies them instead of judging each case on its own.
|
Continue the TGT and WMT debt-and-lease review using each company's 10-K. Objective Build a component review that shows what each company's reported debt contains, rate the comparability of each reconciled component, and calculate one leverage measure if its support tests pass. Data rules - Call the FMP statements tool, endpoint financial-reports-form-10-k-json, period FY: symbol TGT year 2024, and symbol WMT year 2025. Confirm each response is the 10-K for the expected period end (TGT 2025-02-01, WMT 2025-01-31). - Keep filing excerpts separate from the FMP values in Tables 1 and 2. - Keep each amount and caption as the filing presents it. A component the filing does not break out is Unavailable, not zero. A reported zero stays zero. - Do not use web search or other sources. - Scope: borrowings, finance lease liabilities and operating lease liabilities recognized on the balance sheet. Other obligations are outside the review and are listed only in step 7. Steps 1. From each balance sheet and debt and lease note, record every borrowing, carrying adjustment, finance lease liability and operating lease liability, with caption, amount and the line where it is presented. If a line is an aggregate of several items, record it as one aggregate row, name the items the filing says it contains, and state whether the filing gives an amount for any of them separately. 2. Map each FMP field in Table 1 to the filing lines that make it up. 3. For each row, decide whether reported debt already includes it, propose a treatment (never add an included component again) and note any double-counting concern. 4. Component ratings. Rate these five items, not individual instrument rows: (a) borrowings at carrying value = every borrowing line plus carrying adjustments, excluding all leases; (b) finance lease liabilities; (c) operating lease liabilities; (d) the FMP capitalLeaseObligations field; (e) FMP totalDebt minus capitalLeaseObligations. Rows such as notes and debentures or unsecured fixed-rate debt are inputs to (a) and are not rated. For each item record the presentation difference (inside or outside reported debt at each company, or the FMP field's contents), then apply one status: - Comparable after reconciliation: same definition and same coverage (the instruments or obligations the amount includes) at both companies once the component is separated, and a separately disclosed amount (balance-sheet line or note amount) at both. - Comparable with limits: same definition, but at least one company reports the component together with other items in an aggregate. - Not comparable: the field or derived figure means different things at the two companies. - Unavailable: the filing does not disclose it separately. 5. Leverage measure = (borrowings + carrying adjustments + finance lease liabilities + operating lease liabilities) / total shareholders' equity including nonredeemable noncontrolling interest. Numerator test: every part is a separately disclosed amount (a balance-sheet line or a note amount), or an aggregate that the filing presents as part of borrowings at carrying value; use an aggregate as reported. Denominator test: total equity from the balance sheet, including nonredeemable noncontrolling interest and excluding redeemable noncontrolling interest, for the same consolidated group as the numerator. Use FMP totalEquity only if it equals that figure. Calculate the measure only if both tests pass. Support result: Supported with all parts separately disclosed (no aggregate used); Supported with a reported aggregate (name the aggregate and list the component-level conclusions that stay unavailable); or Not calculated (give the reason). Show FMP totalDebt and totalEquity beside the figures and state whether the numerator equals FMP totalDebt. 6. Limitation levels. For each limitation found, state which level it is. Prevents only a component comparison: an aggregate inside borrowings that the filing presents as part of borrowings; different instrument coverage; an FMP field holding different obligations; FMP equity that includes redeemable noncontrolling interest when the balance sheet gives the correct figure. Prevents the leverage calculation: a numerator part that is Unavailable or cannot be traced to filing lines; an aggregate not stated to be part of borrowings or leases; no filing figure for the denominator on the same consolidated group; a lease note and balance sheet that disagree on a total without explanation. Record each limitation in the Limit column of Table 5, or in the support rows of Table 6 when it concerns the numerator or denominator. 7. Other obligations outside the review: for each company, list those of these types that the 10-K quantifies, with amount and where it is presented: purchase obligations, leases signed but not yet commenced, supplier finance programs, guarantees. Do not search for other types and do not add any of these to a measure. Output Start with one line confirming each filing's document type and period end. Table 3: Company | FMP field | Filing lines it contains | Filing amount (USD M) Table 4: Company | Component | Amount (USD M) | Source definition | Included in reported debt | Proposed treatment | Supporting disclosure | Double-counting concern Table 5: Item | TGT amount (USD M) | WMT amount (USD M) | Presentation difference | Status | Limit, and its level from step 6 Rows: the five items from step 4. Table 6: Item | TGT | WMT Rows: numerator parts | numerator total | FMP totalDebt | numerator equals FMP totalDebt | denominator from the balance sheet | FMP totalEquity | measure | numerator test | denominator test | support result | component-level conclusions that stay unavailable Table 7: Company | Obligation | Amount (USD M) | Where the 10-K presents it Then explain in at most three sentences which figures are not comparable and why, and add one sentence on what matching FMP totalDebt does and does not show. Do not rank the companies or assess refinancing risk. |
What Prompt 2 returned
Claude confirmed both responses as Form 10-Ks: Target's for the period ended February 1, 2025 (FMP year 2024) and Walmart's for January 31, 2025 (FMP year 2025). It noted that each Table 3 mapping is inferred by matching amounts to the filing lines, since the standardized response does not state which filing lines feed each field. Amounts are in USD millions as the filings present them. Tables 4 and 5 are each split in two below for readability; every figure and rating is as Claude returned it.
Table 3. FMP fields mapped to filing lines (USD millions)
|
Company |
FMP field |
Filing lines it contains |
Filing amount (USD M) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
TGT |
shortTermDebt |
Balance sheet: current portion of long-term debt and other borrowings (includes current finance lease 136 per Leases note) |
1,636 |
|
TGT |
longTermDebt |
Balance sheet: long-term debt and other borrowings (includes noncurrent finance lease 2,025) |
14,304 |
|
TGT |
capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent |
Current operating lease liabilities, within accrued and other current liabilities |
353 |
|
TGT |
capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent |
Balance sheet: noncurrent operating lease liabilities |
3,582 |
|
TGT |
capitalLeaseObligations |
Operating lease liabilities, Leases note (353 + 3,582) |
3,935 |
|
TGT |
totalDebt |
1,636 + 14,304 + 3,935 |
19,875 |
|
TGT |
totalEquity |
Total shareholders' investment |
14,666 |
|
WMT |
shortTermDebt |
Short-term borrowings 3,068 + long-term debt due within one year 2,598 |
5,666 |
|
WMT |
longTermDebt |
Balance sheet: long-term debt |
33,401 |
|
WMT |
capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent |
Operating lease obligations due within one year 1,499 + finance lease obligations due within one year 800 |
2,299 |
|
WMT |
capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent |
Long-term operating lease obligations 12,825 + long-term finance lease obligations 5,923 |
18,748 |
|
WMT |
capitalLeaseObligations |
Net lease obligations: operating 14,324 + finance 6,723 (Leases note) |
21,047 |
|
WMT |
totalDebt |
5,666 + 33,401 + 21,047 |
60,114 |
|
WMT |
totalEquity |
Total shareholders' equity 97,421 + redeemable noncontrolling interest 271 |
97,692 |
Target's lease field holds operating leases only, because its finance leases already sit inside its debt lines. Walmart's holds both lease types. Neither total counts a lease twice, but the field name does not tell a user which obligations it holds. This is the field-level form of the mapping risk examined in how to reconcile standardized and as-reported financial statements.
Table 4a. Component review: amounts and inclusion (USD millions; parentheses show a negative amount)
|
Company and component |
Amount (USD M) |
Source definition |
Included in reported debt |
|---|---|---|---|
|
TGT: Total notes and debentures |
13,904 |
Note caption |
Yes |
|
TGT: Swap valuation adjustments |
(125) |
Note caption |
Yes (reduces carrying value) |
|
TGT: Commercial paper |
0 (reported zero) |
"No commercial paper outstanding" at Feb. 1, 2025 |
Not applicable |
|
TGT: Finance lease liabilities |
2,161 (136 current + 2,025 noncurrent) |
Note caption; Leases note classifies both in the debt captions |
Yes |
|
TGT: Current operating lease liabilities |
353 |
Within accrued and other current liabilities |
No |
|
TGT: Noncurrent operating lease liabilities |
3,582 |
Balance sheet line |
No |
|
WMT: Short-term borrowings |
3,068 |
Note: consists of commercial paper and lines of credit |
Yes |
|
WMT: Long-term debt due within one year |
2,598 |
Balance sheet line; part of note "Total debt" 35,999 |
Yes |
|
WMT: Long-term debt |
33,401 |
Balance sheet line; part of 35,999 |
Yes |
|
WMT: Unsecured fixed-rate debt |
36,846 (USD 31,406; EUR 1,715; GBP 3,336; JPY 389) |
Note table |
Yes |
|
WMT: Total other (carrying adjustments) |
(847) |
Aggregate: deferred loan costs, discounts, fair value hedges, foreign-held debt and secured debt |
Yes (36,846 − 847 = 35,999) |
|
WMT: Finance lease obligations |
6,723 (800 current + 5,923 long-term) |
Balance sheet lines; Leases note |
No (separate captions, not in 35,999) |
|
WMT: Operating lease obligations |
14,324 (1,499 current + 12,825 long-term) |
Balance sheet lines; Leases note |
No |
Table 4b. Component review: treatment and double-counting checks
|
Company and component |
Proposed treatment |
Supporting disclosure |
Double-counting concern |
|---|---|---|---|
|
TGT: Total notes and debentures |
Include once in borrowings |
Commercial Paper and Long-Term Debt note, maturities table |
None |
|
TGT: Swap valuation adjustments |
Include once as carrying adjustment |
Same note |
None |
|
TGT: Commercial paper |
Keep as zero |
Same note, narrative |
None |
|
TGT: Finance lease liabilities |
Include once as finance leases |
Debt note; Leases note |
Adding 2,161 to FMP totalDebt counts it twice |
|
TGT: Current operating lease liabilities |
Add once as operating leases |
Accrued liabilities note; Leases note |
FMP holds it in capitalLeaseObligationsCurrent; do not add it again |
|
TGT: Noncurrent operating lease liabilities |
Add once as operating leases |
Balance sheet; Leases note |
FMP holds it in capitalLeaseObligationsNonCurrent |
|
WMT: Short-term borrowings |
Include as reported aggregate |
Short-term Borrowings and Long-term Debt note |
Filing gives no separate amount for commercial paper vs lines; FMP shortTermDebt also holds the 2,598 below |
|
WMT: Long-term debt due within one year |
Do not add to 35,999 |
Same note |
Counted twice if added to 35,999 |
|
WMT: Long-term debt |
Do not add to 35,999 |
Same note |
Same |
|
WMT: Unsecured fixed-rate debt |
Include once |
Same note |
None |
|
WMT: Total other (carrying adjustments) |
Use as reported aggregate |
Same note, footnote (2) |
Filing gives no amount for any item separately |
|
WMT: Finance lease obligations |
Add once as finance leases |
Leases note |
FMP holds them in capitalLeaseObligations |
|
WMT: Operating lease obligations |
Add once as operating leases |
Leases note |
FMP holds them in capitalLeaseObligations |
Walmart's long-term debt due within one year and its long-term debt are the two halves of the note's 35,999 total, so neither is added to it again. Walmart's total other is the only row where the filing names the items inside a line but gives no amount for any of them.
Table 5a. Component ratings: amounts and status (USD millions)
|
Item |
TGT amount (USD M) |
WMT amount (USD M) |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
(a) Borrowings at carrying value, excluding leases |
13,779 (13,904 − 125) |
39,067 (3,068 + 35,999) |
Comparable with limits |
|
(b) Finance lease liabilities |
2,161 |
6,723 |
Comparable after reconciliation |
|
(c) Operating lease liabilities |
3,935 |
14,324 |
Comparable after reconciliation |
|
(d) FMP capitalLeaseObligations |
3,935 (operating leases only) |
21,047 (operating 14,324 + finance 6,723) |
Not comparable |
|
(e) FMP totalDebt minus capitalLeaseObligations |
15,940 (borrowings 13,779 + finance leases 2,161) |
39,067 (borrowings only) |
Not comparable |
Table 5b. Component ratings: presentation differences and limits
|
Item |
Presentation difference |
Limit, and its level |
|---|---|---|
|
(a) Borrowings at carrying value, excluding leases |
TGT shows finance leases inside its debt captions, so borrowings come from the note. WMT shows borrowings and leases on separate lines. |
WMT reports Total other (847) and short-term borrowings as aggregates, so the carrying-adjustment and commercial paper vs lines comparisons are unavailable. Level: prevents only a component comparison |
|
(b) Finance lease liabilities |
TGT: inside reported debt. WMT: outside reported debt. |
None |
|
(c) Operating lease liabilities |
Outside reported debt at both. TGT's current part sits in accrued liabilities. |
None |
|
(d) FMP capitalLeaseObligations |
The field holds different obligations at the two companies. |
FMP field holding different obligations. Level: prevents only a component comparison |
|
(e) FMP totalDebt minus capitalLeaseObligations |
TGT's figure includes finance leases. WMT's does not. |
Different instrument coverage. Level: prevents only a component comparison |
The presentation differences are recorded but not rated. Finance leases sit inside reported debt at Target and outside it at Walmart, and after separation the two amounts are still rated Comparable after reconciliation. The instrument rows in Table 4 are inputs to row (a) and carry no rating of their own.
Table 6. Leverage measure support
|
Item |
TGT |
WMT |
|---|---|---|
|
Numerator part: borrowings |
13,904 |
3,068 + 35,999 = 39,067 |
|
Numerator part: carrying adjustments |
(125) swap valuation |
Included in 35,999 as Total other (847) |
|
Numerator part: finance leases |
2,161 |
6,723 |
|
Numerator part: operating leases |
3,935 |
14,324 |
|
Numerator total |
19,875 |
60,114 |
|
FMP totalDebt |
19,875 |
60,114 |
|
Numerator equals FMP totalDebt |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Denominator from balance sheet |
14,666 (no noncontrolling interest line) |
97,421 (91,013 + nonredeemable NCI 6,408; excludes redeemable NCI 271) |
|
FMP totalEquity |
14,666 (equals balance sheet) |
97,692 (differs by 271, the redeemable NCI) |
|
Measure |
1.36x |
0.62x |
|
Numerator test |
Pass: every part is a separately disclosed note or balance sheet amount |
Pass: Total other (847) is presented as part of borrowings at carrying value |
|
Denominator test |
Pass, using 14,666 |
Pass, using the balance sheet 97,421, not FMP's 97,692 |
|
Support result |
Supported with all parts separately disclosed (no aggregate used) |
Supported with a reported aggregate: Total other (847) |
|
Component-level conclusions that stay unavailable |
None |
Split of the 847 among deferred loan costs, discounts, fair value hedges, foreign-held debt and secured debt; secured debt amount; commercial paper vs lines of credit within the 3,068 |
Claude added that Walmart's FMP equity includes redeemable noncontrolling interest where the balance sheet gives the correct figure, a limit that prevents only a component comparison and not the leverage calculation.
Table 7. Other obligations (not added to any measure; USD millions)
|
Company |
Obligation |
Amount (USD M) |
Where the 10-K presents it |
|---|---|---|---|
|
TGT |
Purchase obligations |
1,200 (stated as $1.2 billion) |
Commitments and Contingencies note, Commitments |
|
TGT |
Leases signed but not yet commenced |
Operating 186; finance 128 (legally binding minimum lease payments, undiscounted) |
Leases note, maturity table footnotes (a) and (b) |
|
TGT |
Real estate obligations, which include the leases above |
1,500 (stated as $1.5 billion) |
Commitments and Contingencies note. Overlaps the 186 and 128, so do not sum |
|
TGT |
Supplier finance program |
3,666 confirmed obligations outstanding |
Supplier Finance Programs note; within accounts payable |
|
TGT |
Guarantees |
Not quantified as guarantees in the response |
Not applicable |
|
WMT |
Purchase obligations |
Not located in the response |
Not applicable |
|
WMT |
Leases signed but not yet commenced |
Not located in the response |
Not applicable |
|
WMT |
Supplier finance program |
5,725 confirmed obligations outstanding at year end |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Supplier Financing Program Obligations; generally in accounts payable |
|
WMT |
Guarantee-type obligations |
Maximum potential future payments 3,100 (stated as $3.1 billion); carrying value about 600 (stated as $0.6 billion) |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Indemnification Liabilities; carried in deferred income taxes and other |
Claude noted that "Not located" means its search of the filing response found nothing, which does not show that the 10-K has no such disclosure, and that Walmart's indemnities are described in the filing as divestiture indemnifications, not as guarantees.
Claude's closing statement: FMP capitalLeaseObligations holds only operating leases at Target (3,935) but operating plus finance leases at Walmart (21,047). FMP totalDebt minus that field therefore includes finance leases at Target (15,940) and excludes them at Walmart (39,067). Walmart's FMP totalEquity also includes 271 of redeemable noncontrolling interest. Matching FMP totalDebt shows that each numerator ties to filing lines and note amounts, but it does not show that the two companies' FMP debt fields are defined alike.
Reading the review
On the filing amounts, the standardized total is complete for both companies. FMP's totalDebt equals borrowings plus every lease liability, 19,875 for Target and 60,114 for Walmart, each numerator built from filing lines and note amounts ties to it exactly, and no component is counted twice. The risk sits in what the fields are called. The capitalLeaseObligations field holds only operating leases at Target (3,935) and operating plus finance leases at Walmart (21,047), so subtracting it from totalDebt leaves 15,940 at Target, which still contains 2,161 of finance leases, and 39,067 at Walmart, which contains none. Claude rated both figures Not comparable.
Once the components are separated, the picture changes. Finance and operating lease liabilities are Comparable after reconciliation, even though Target presents finance leases inside its debt lines and Walmart presents them outside, because each amount is separately disclosed and means the same thing at both companies. Borrowings at carrying value, 13,779 at Target and 39,067 at Walmart, are Comparable with limits. Walmart's total other of 847 and its short-term borrowings are aggregates, so comparisons of carrying adjustments, secured debt, or commercial paper against credit lines are unavailable. Neither limit stops the leverage measure.
The measure is 1.36x for Target, with every part separately disclosed, and 0.62x for Walmart, supported with the reported aggregate. Walmart's denominator is the balance-sheet figure of 97,421, because FMP's totalEquity of 97,692 includes 271 of redeemable noncontrolling interest that the balance sheet places outside equity. The ratio describes balance-sheet structure on one defined basis. It supports no judgment on credit quality or refinancing, which belongs to a wider view of corporate financial health across standardized datasets.
The review's boundary shows in Table 7. Target discloses purchase obligations of about $1.2 billion, real estate obligations of about $1.5 billion that include leases signed but not yet commenced (minimum payments of $186 million operating and $128 million finance, which overlap the $1.5 billion and should not be summed), and $3,666 million of supplier finance obligations inside accounts payable. Walmart discloses $5,725 million of supplier finance obligations and divestiture indemnifications with a maximum of about $3.1 billion and a carrying value of about $0.6 billion. Claude did not locate purchase obligations or not-yet-commenced leases for Walmart, but that rests on a search of the filing response and does not show the 10-K has no such disclosure. None of these amounts is in any measure here. Whether an item belongs in an adjusted debt figure is a separate decision that starts with the note behind it.
When analyst review is required
The two levels of limitation lead to two different actions.
Hold the component comparison when:
- a filing combines borrowings with carrying adjustments or secured debt in a single aggregate, as Walmart's total other does;
- the instruments two companies list under borrowings differ in coverage;
- a standardized lease field holds different obligations at each company;
- the equity figure from a data source includes items the balance sheet places outside equity, and the balance sheet gives the correct figure.
The leverage measure can still be calculated in these cases, and its support result names what stays unavailable.
Do not calculate the leverage measure when:
- A numerator part is Unavailable or cannot be traced to filing lines;
- An aggregate is not stated to be part of borrowings or leases;
- No filing figure exists for the denominator on the same consolidated group;
- A lease note and the balance sheet give different totals for the same liability, with no explanation.
In every case the next step is a read of the note behind the affected line, before the component is used in any measure.
Putting the inventory to work
A component inventory is most useful where debt feeds a larger calculation. In an enterprise-value build, the choice to include operating leases has to match the treatment of lease costs in the earnings measure beside it, a pairing that matters in detecting valuation disconnects through integrated fundamental and market analysis. The equity side of that build depends on share counts, covered in building reliable valuation time series from shares outstanding. Lease treatment is one of the debt definitions flagged for closer review in enterprise value and capital structure data APIs, and a component inventory is what that review produces.
For a wider peer set, run Prompt 2 for each company before any leverage ratio enters a comparison, and keep Tables 4 to 6 with the result so each ratio can be traced to its components and the limits attached to them.
To run the review on your own peer set, connect the FMP MCP server in Claude and see the Financial Reports Form 10-K JSON API documentation for the parameters used here.
Financial APIs, Claude MCP, and AI-driven research workflows
Pranjal Saxena writes technical content focused on financial data APIs, Claude MCP workflows, AI-driven research systems, and Python-based market analysis. For FMP, his work centers on turning structured financial data into practical, workflow-driven content for developers, analysts, and fintech teams. He combines experience in data science, NLP, generative AI, and financial API workflows to show how APIs, automation, and AI-assisted systems can support modern financial research and analysis.
Financial data for every need
Real-time quotes and 30+ years of historical data, including prices, fundamentals, and insider transactions — all accessible via API.
Create Free Account