Helping communities thrive
Menu
Helping communities thrive
Menu
Best Companies for the Future: Methodology
The Best Companies for the Future ranking, created by Bendable Labs for the WSJ Leadership Institute, evaluates how large corporations stack up in six areas: AI readiness, innovation, talent readiness, financial fitness, resilience and agility.
To be ranked, a company had to be part of the S&P 500 stock index as of Dec. 31, 2025.
The ranking was built on 30 separate indicators based on data from 20 different providers. In many cases, the data was industry relativized so that each company could be compared to all of the others in the S&P 500 on a level playing field.
Scores were standardized with a typical range of 0 to 100, a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. A company that scores a 60 is in the top 15% or so of the universe of companies covered, a 70 in the top 2% or so. A company that scores a 40 is in the bottom 15% or so, a 30 in the bottom 2% or so.
To be scored in AI readiness, innovation, talent readiness, financial fitness or agility, a company had to have at least three valid indicators. In resilience, it had to have at least two.
If a company had a sufficient number of indicators to be scored in a particular area but there was still missing data, its total score in that area reflects the average of those indicators it did have. For example, if a company had five of the seven AI-readiness indicators, its total AI-readiness score was derived from an average of the five.
None of the six areas was given more weight than any other; each accounts for one-sixth, or about 16.7%, of a company’s overall score.
As a final step, a company’s overall future-readiness score was calculated using a statistical measure called geometric mean. The intent was to reward those companies that are consistently strong across all areas and penalize those that have high variability in their scores.
A variety of statistical tests were applied to the ranking model. Among the key findings:
All areas were positively correlated, with no values exceeding 0.6. This indicates that all of the disparate data is measuring some aspect of the same thing—what we’re calling future readiness—without there being so much overlap that we’re measuring the same thing twice.
A principal component analysis (PCA) showed that the weights for each area range from 14% to 20%. This balance indicates that all of the areas contribute to explaining future readiness; no one dominates, and none is superfluous. (As noted above, we decided in the end to weigh each area equally, at 16.7%, because this is so close to what was determined by the PCA.)
Factor loadings, which measure the strength and direction of the relationship between each area and future readiness, ranged from 0.34 to 0.48. This shows that these areas share some common signal (companies well positioned for the future tend to score higher across the board), but each area also carries substantial unique information. A company can be No. 5 in AI readiness, but No. 200 in resilience, and that contrast is real, not noise.
Coverage across all areas is strong, at 94% to 100% of the S&P 500. No scores resulted from a preponderance of missing data.
Data Sources
Indicator
Data Provider
What's Measured
Computational Details
Data as of
AI Readiness
AI Adoption
MIT FutureTech
Employing a large language model, government securities filings (10-K) were assessed to determine the extent to which a company has integrated AI into its operations or is using AI in the production of goods and delivery of services.
Filings for 2021–2025 were assessed, with more recent filings carrying greater weight (30%, 25%, 15%, 15% and 15%, respectively). Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Readiness Index
CB Insights
Using a proprietary algorithm, the extent of a company's AI-related investments, M&A activity and strategic partnerships was gauged.
Investments account for 45% of the score, M&A activity 30% and partnerships 25%. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Feb. 10, 2026
Digital Positioning Score
ROI Rocket
A company's overall digital presence—viewed as a harbinger of its readiness to adopt AI—was evaluated based on measures of its online activity.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Workforce Readiness
Revelio Labs
A score was calculated to reflect a company's AI exposure vs. its AI adoption. Exposure is the share of tasks in the company's industry that can be performed or augmented by AI. Adoption is the share of its workers actively using AI, as determined from job postings and employees' LinkedIn profiles.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Future-Oriented HR Roles
Revelio Labs
A company's HR roles (as seen in LinkedIn profiles) were examined to determine how big a share are oriented toward AI, reskilling, learning, workforce transformation and change management. This recognizes that successful AI adoption is as much about people as it is about technology.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Profile Prevalence
Burning Glass Institute
An assessment was made of how prevalent AI is in the skills and experience sections of a company's employees' LinkedIn profiles.
Data was relativized at the occupation level. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
AI-Ready Boards
Diligent
Keywords in independent directors' bios and the names of board committees were analyzed to determine if a company has expertise and a dedicated structure at the board level to provide insight and oversight into advanced technology.
Directors' bios account for 80% of the score, with 10% based on committee structure and 10% on whether members of relevant committees have AI or tech backgrounds. In certain "tech native" industries, in which there is a near-total absence of tech-related committees, directors' bios account for 100% of the score. The total AI-Ready Boards score accounts for one-seventh of the AI Readiness score.
March 31, 2026
AI Adoption
Data Provider
MIT FutureTech
What's Measured
Employing a large language model, government securities filings (10-K) were assessed to determine the extent to which a company has integrated AI into its operations or is using AI in the production of goods and delivery of services.
Computational Details
Filings for 2021–2025 were assessed, with more recent filings carrying greater weight (30%, 25%, 15%, 15% and 15%, respectively). Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Readiness Index
Data Provider
CB Insights
What's Measured
Using a proprietary algorithm, the extent of a company's AI-related investments, M&A activity and strategic partnerships was gauged.
Computational Details
Investments account for 45% of the score, M&A activity 30% and partnerships 25%. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Feb. 10, 2026
Digital Positioning Score
Data Provider
ROI Rocket
What's Measured
A company's overall digital presence—viewed as a harbinger of its readiness to adopt AI—was evaluated based on measures of its online activity.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Workforce Readiness
Data Provider
Revelio Labs
What's Measured
A score was calculated to reflect a company's AI exposure vs. its AI adoption. Exposure is the share of tasks in the company's industry that can be performed or augmented by AI. Adoption is the share of its workers actively using AI, as determined from job postings and employees' LinkedIn profiles.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Future-Oriented HR Roles
Data Provider
Revelio Labs
What's Measured
A company's HR roles (as seen in LinkedIn profiles) were examined to determine how big a share are oriented toward AI, reskilling, learning, workforce transformation and change management. This recognizes that successful AI adoption is as much about people as it is about technology.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
AI Profile Prevalence
Data Provider
Burning Glass Institute
What's Measured
An assessment was made of how prevalent AI is in the skills and experience sections of a company's employees' LinkedIn profiles.
Computational Details
Data was relativized at the occupation level. This accounts for one-seventh of the total AI Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
AI-Ready Boards
Data Provider
Diligent
What's Measured
Keywords in independent directors' bios and the names of board committees were analyzed to determine if a company has expertise and a dedicated structure at the board level to provide insight and oversight into advanced technology.
Computational Details
Directors' bios account for 80% of the score, with 10% based on committee structure and 10% on whether members of relevant committees have AI or tech backgrounds. In certain "tech native" industries, in which there is a near-total absence of tech-related committees, directors' bios account for 100% of the score. The total AI-Ready Boards score accounts for one-seventh of the AI Readiness score.
Data as of
March 31, 2026
Innovation
R&D Spending
FactSet
The three-year average of a company's research and development spending was calculated.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
End of fiscal year 2025
R&D Momentum
FactSet
A calculation was made to capture whether a company has been accelerating or decelerating its research and development spending over the past three years.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Patent Count
Clarivate
The average number of patent filings made by a company over the past three years was captured.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Patent Value
Northwestern University's Dimitris Papanikolaou
_____________
Stanford University's Amit Seru
The value of a company's technological innovations, based on stock market reactions to patent grants, was compared to its revenue.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Dec. 31, 2024
Leading-Edge Roles
Revelio Labs
Based on LinkedIn profiles, an analysis was made of a company's headcount in leading-edge roles outside of AI, including in robotics, autonomous vehicles, blockchain and digital currencies, database management, cloud computing, data privacy and protection, drones and green jobs.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Frontier Skills
Burning Glass Institute
Using job-posting data, the extent to which a company is looking for employees with leading-edge skills (outside of AI) was assessed. To qualify, the skill must have had positive and high growth, as well as a positive and high wage premium, over the past five years.
Data was relativized at the occupation level. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Dec. 31, 2025
R&D Spending
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
The three-year average of a company's research and development spending was calculated.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
R&D Momentum
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
A calculation was made to capture whether a company has been accelerating or decelerating its research and development spending over the past three years.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Patent Count
Data Provider
Clarivate
What's Measured
The average number of patent filings made by a company over the past three years was captured.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Patent Value
Data Provider
Northwestern University's Dimitris Papanikolaou
_____________
Stanford University's Amit Seru
What's Measured
The value of a company's technological innovations, based on stock market reactions to patent grants, was compared to its revenue.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2024
Leading-Edge Roles
Data Provider
Revelio Labs
What's Measured
Based on LinkedIn profiles, an analysis was made of a company's headcount in leading-edge roles outside of AI, including in robotics, autonomous vehicles, blockchain and digital currencies, database management, cloud computing, data privacy and protection, drones and green jobs.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Frontier Skills
Data Provider
Burning Glass Institute
What's Measured
Using job-posting data, the extent to which a company is looking for employees with leading-edge skills (outside of AI) was assessed. To qualify, the skill must have had positive and high growth, as well as a positive and high wage premium, over the past five years.
Computational Details
Data was relativized at the occupation level. This accounts for one-sixth of the total Innovation score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Talent Readiness
Work Wellbeing Score
Indeed
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer on four key dimensions that researchers have found measure workplace well-being: whether people feel happy at work, whether they have a clear sense of purpose, whether they are satisfied with their job overall, and whether they don't feel stressed at work most of the time.
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Career Opportunities Rating
Glassdoor
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale.
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Senior Management Rating
Glassdoor
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale.
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Gen Z Retention
Revelio Labs
Using LinkedIn profiles, an analysis was made of a company's attrition rate of its Gen Z workers (those born between 1996 and 2012).
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Skills-Based Hiring Readiness
Opportunity@Work
Looking at job postings, social profiles and annual reports, a company was evaluated on the extent to which it opens jobs to workers without bachelor’s degrees; how clearly it defines the skills required to do the job and the economic value of those skills; the extent to which it enables workers to build skills on the job and move up internally; and the extent to which skills-based hiring is an intentional strategy.
This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Flex Index
Flex Index
A company's work-from-home policy for its office workers was analyzed.
A company was awarded the most points for having a hybrid structure, with some credit given for being fully flexible and no points for having a full-time in-office mandate. Frontline roles at retailers, manufacturers and others where you can't realistically work from home were excluded. This accounts for 5% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Work Wellbeing Score
Data Provider
Indeed
What's Measured
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer on four key dimensions that researchers have found measure workplace well-being: whether people feel happy at work, whether they have a clear sense of purpose, whether they are satisfied with their job overall, and whether they don't feel stressed at work most of the time.
Computational Details
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Career Opportunities Rating
Data Provider
Glassdoor
What's Measured
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale.
Computational Details
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Senior Management Rating
Data Provider
Glassdoor
What's Measured
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale.
Computational Details
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses was required. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Gen Z Retention
Data Provider
Revelio Labs
What's Measured
Using LinkedIn profiles, an analysis was made of a company's attrition rate of its Gen Z workers (those born between 1996 and 2012).
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Skills-Based Hiring Readiness
Data Provider
Opportunity@Work
What's Measured
Looking at job postings, social profiles and annual reports, a company was evaluated on the extent to which it opens jobs to workers without bachelor’s degrees; how clearly it defines the skills required to do the job and the economic value of those skills; the extent to which it enables workers to build skills on the job and move up internally; and the extent to which skills-based hiring is an intentional strategy.
Computational Details
This accounts for 19% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Flex Index
Data Provider
Flex Index
What's Measured
A company's work-from-home policy for its office workers was analyzed.
Computational Details
A company was awarded the most points for having a hybrid structure, with some credit given for being fully flexible and no points for having a full-time in-office mandate. Frontline roles at retailers, manufacturers and others where you can't realistically work from home were excluded. This accounts for 5% of the total Talent Readiness score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Financial Fitness
Profitability
FactSet
To assess a company's ability to generate profits, we analyzed its return on assets, return on invested capital (ROIC), gross margin, operating margin, free cash flow margin, operating cash flow to net income, and ROIC vs. weighted average cost of capital.
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 15% of the Financial Fitness score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Balance Sheet Strength
FactSet
To assess whether a company is solvent and safe, we analyzed its debt-to-equity ratio; net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; interest coverage; and S&P long-term credit ratings.
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Debt-to-equity ratio was industry relativized. This accounts for 20% of the Financial Fitness score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Growth Trajectory
FactSet
To assess the strength of a company's growth path, we analyzed gross margin, operating margin, earnings per share, free cash flow per share, dividend per share, revenue per share and excess stock return.
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 25% of the Financial Fitness score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Financial Stability
FactSet
To assess the stability of a company's financial performance, we analyzed the level of variability in its return on invested capital (ROIC), return on assets, gross margin, operating margin, free cash flow and revenue gains.
Data was analyzed over a 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized, with the exception of ROIC and revenue gains, where scores went up the more positive years of performance a company had. This accounts for 10% of the Financial Fitness score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Competitive Position
Morningstar
_____________
Brand Finance
To assess a company's competitive position, we used Morningstar's "economic moat" rating, which analyzes the strength of a company's network effect, intangible assets, cost advantage, switching costs and efficient scale. A company's score was then raised if it appeared in the Brand Finance Global 500 ranking of top brands, with a higher rank getting a bigger boost.
The economic moat rating accounts for 75% of the Competitive Position score and Brand Finance 25%. The total Competitive Position score accounts for 30% of the Financial Fitness score.
End of fiscal year 2025
Profitability
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
To assess a company's ability to generate profits, we analyzed its return on assets, return on invested capital (ROIC), gross margin, operating margin, free cash flow margin, operating cash flow to net income, and ROIC vs. weighted average cost of capital.
Computational Details
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 15% of the Financial Fitness score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Balance Sheet Strength
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
To assess whether a company is solvent and safe, we analyzed its debt-to-equity ratio; net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; interest coverage; and S&P long-term credit ratings.
Computational Details
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Debt-to-equity ratio was industry relativized. This accounts for 20% of the Financial Fitness score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Growth Trajectory
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
To assess the strength of a company's growth path, we analyzed gross margin, operating margin, earnings per share, free cash flow per share, dividend per share, revenue per share and excess stock return.
Computational Details
Data was analyzed over a three-year and 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 25% of the Financial Fitness score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Financial Stability
Data Provider
FactSet
What's Measured
To assess the stability of a company's financial performance, we analyzed the level of variability in its return on invested capital (ROIC), return on assets, gross margin, operating margin, free cash flow and revenue gains.
Computational Details
Data was analyzed over a 10-year horizon. Data was industry relativized, with the exception of ROIC and revenue gains, where scores went up the more positive years of performance a company had. This accounts for 10% of the Financial Fitness score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Competitive Position
Data Provider
Morningstar
_____________
Brand Finance
What's Measured
To assess a company's competitive position, we used Morningstar's "economic moat" rating, which analyzes the strength of a company's network effect, intangible assets, cost advantage, switching costs and efficient scale. A company's score was then raised if it appeared in the Brand Finance Global 500 ranking of top brands, with a higher rank getting a bigger boost.
Computational Details
The economic moat rating accounts for 75% of the Competitive Position score and Brand Finance 25%. The total Competitive Position score accounts for 30% of the Financial Fitness score.
Data as of
End of fiscal year 2025
Resilience
Supply-Chain Readiness
Aquisio.ai
_____________
Supply Chain Resource Cooperative at NC State University
A company was assessed in three areas: its supply-chain resilience, the extent to which it is employing AI in its supplier networks and how much it has integrated its supply base into its innovation and strategy.
This accounts for 50% of the total Resilience score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Geopolitical Risk
Aquisio.ai
_____________
Dragonfly
Geopolitical risk was evaluated by using Aquisio.ai's assessment of the countries in which a company derives its revenue and has significant numbers of employees and Dragonfly's assessment of a country's risk level (from "negligible" to "critical") as related to civil unrest, terrorism, corruption, cyber threat exposure and a host of other factors.
This accounts for 30% of the total Resilience score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Implied Temperature Rise
MSCI
An assessment was made of how well aligned a company's emissions performance is with global temperature goals based on its past emissions track record and credible stated reduction targets.
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 20% of the total Resilience score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Supply-Chain Readiness
Data Provider
Aquisio.ai
_____________
Supply Chain Resource Cooperative at NC State University
What's Measured
A company was assessed in three areas: its supply-chain resilience, the extent to which it is employing AI in its supplier networks and how much it has integrated its supply base into its innovation and strategy.
Computational Details
This accounts for 50% of the total Resilience score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Geopolitical Risk
Data Provider
Aquisio.ai
_____________
Dragonfly
What's Measured
Geopolitical risk was evaluated by using Aquisio.ai's assessment of the countries in which a company derives its revenue and has significant numbers of employees and Dragonfly's assessment of a country's risk level (from "negligible" to "critical") as related to civil unrest, terrorism, corruption, cyber threat exposure and a host of other factors.
Computational Details
This accounts for 30% of the total Resilience score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Implied Temperature Rise
Data Provider
MSCI
What's Measured
An assessment was made of how well aligned a company's emissions performance is with global temperature goals based on its past emissions track record and credible stated reduction targets.
Computational Details
Data was industry relativized. This accounts for 20% of the total Resilience score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Agility
Overhead Growth Index
Management Lab
A company's change in executive share of total headcount over the past five years was measured.
Executive share was computed as the ratio of SVPs/senior leaders and C-suite/top executives (from Revelio Labs) to total employees (from company 10-K filings). This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Overhead Growth Index (relative to sales)
Management Lab
A company was evaluated based on whether its revenue growth has outpaced the growth in its executive share of total headcount over the past five years.
The indicator was computed using the log-ratio of revenue growth to executive share growth. Executive share was computed as the ratio of SVPs/senior leaders and C-suite/top executives (from Revelio Labs) to total employees (from company 10-K filings). This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Culture & Values Rating
Glassdoor
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale. This recognizes that for a company to be agile, it not only needs the right structure; it also needs the right culture.
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses is required. This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Dec. 31, 2025
Overhead Growth Index
Data Provider
Management Lab
What's Measured
A company's change in executive share of total headcount over the past five years was measured.
Computational Details
Executive share was computed as the ratio of SVPs/senior leaders and C-suite/top executives (from Revelio Labs) to total employees (from company 10-K filings). This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Overhead Growth Index (relative to sales)
Data Provider
Management Lab
What's Measured
A company was evaluated based on whether its revenue growth has outpaced the growth in its executive share of total headcount over the past five years.
Computational Details
The indicator was computed using the log-ratio of revenue growth to executive share growth. Executive share was computed as the ratio of SVPs/senior leaders and C-suite/top executives (from Revelio Labs) to total employees (from company 10-K filings). This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025
Culture & Values Rating
Data Provider
Glassdoor
What's Measured
Results were analyzed from the crowdsourcing site, where workers rate their employer in this area on a 1-5 scale. This recognizes that for a company to be agile, it not only needs the right structure; it also needs the right culture.
Computational Details
To be counted, a minimum of 50 employee responses is required. This accounts for one-third of the total Agility score.
Data as of
Dec. 31, 2025