The subject of a General Electric, Honeywell or Dupont-style break-up is bound to come up again, as the Minneapolis-based group finds itself with $16 billion to settle with various plaintiffs in the cases of its failing hearing protection and so-called PFAS chemicals.

The bill is a hefty one - representing three years' profits - and there's nothing to say that another corpse isn't about to come out of the closet. As a result, 3M's stock market valuation has collapsed to around x8 last year's profits.

Now that's something to pay attention to. 3M hasn't been delivering growth for a long time, but in recent years its return on equity has hovered between 40% and 50%, with financial leverage well under control.

Defenders of the conglomerate model argue that agglomerating the resources of the various divisions makes it possible to sustain high R&D budgets. Without disputing this assertion, it should be noted that 3M's R&D - which typically consumes 5% to 7% of sales - has produced neither growth nor margin expansion.

The case inevitably brings to mind Bayer, itself the subject of numerous disputes and regularly called into question as to the relevance of its structure. For 3M, the example is a good one, even if comparison is not always right.

The American company's dividend should remain unchanged. On the other hand, the settlement of its disputes will no doubt mean a halt to its share buyback program. A pity: the Group has massively repurchased its shares at high levels in recent years; now that a potential discount is emerging, it will probably no longer be in a position to do so.

The spin-off of its healthcare division - expected by the end of the year - should, however, enable it to wipe out a large part of the slate. Provided the financial markets recover in the meantime...