AI-generated analysis for informational purposes only. Not financial advice.
Crunching the numbers…
Crunching the numbers…
Price below 50d & 200d averages. RSI 44 — neutral.
Closest historical profiles by multi-factor similarity.
Sign in to connect your holdings with this analysis.
Sign in to track this thesis — we'll watch whether the assumptions behind it still hold and flag any drift.
An absolute −99…+99 blend of news tone and recent price momentum, with a quarter-over-quarter delta (the change matters more than the level). This differs from the peer-relative Sentiment dimension in the score above — which ranks news tone vs comparable names — so a name can read “Bullish” here on momentum while its score Sentiment sits lower vs peers. Per-headline tags come from a finance lexicon on the headline text only (not the full article) — a fast heuristic that can misread sarcasm or a mixed headline, so treat them as a rough cue, not a judgment.
Peer-relative, six dimensions at a glance.
Logistic model on real price features (980 real samples). A weak directional signal, not a forecast — see Track Record for the honest out-of-sample score. Not advice.
Discounted free cash flow on the company’s real trailing FCF/share: stage-1 growth fading to a terminal rate, discounted at a CAPM (Blume-adjusted) cost of capital.
Top value driver: fcf0 — swings fair value the most.
What the price expects: at today’s price the market is pricing in about 18.4%/yr free-cash-flow growth for 10 years, vs the 15.0% the company is actually running. The price expects materially more than it delivers — a lot has to go right.
Why this can differ from the score: the Average 52 score is peer-relative (how this ranks vs comparable names), while the DCF is an absolute fair-value estimate. A good score with a negative margin of safety = attractive relative to peers, but expensive on absolute cash-flow value.
Drag the sliders to see how the fair value reacts — recomputed live, nothing is saved.
A distribution of outcomes over 5Y, not a single price target.
Median 1.32x vs a diversified market’s 1.49x over the same horizon — this name’s outlook is below the market (both medians, so the comparison is fair).
| Regime | Chance | Return / year |
|---|---|---|
| Bull | 19% | +34% |
| Base | 42% | +8% |
| Bear | 19% | -5% |
| Stress | 7% | -29% |
| Ruin | 13% | -60% |
Why these numbers: the regimes center on an expected return of +7.9%/yr — the three sources of a stock's return: income (0.4% dividend) + earnings growth (-2.6%/yr, capped for prudence), anchored toward the 8% long-run market average, plus a valuation tailwind (+4.0%/yr) because it trades below DCF fair value. The band's width comes from 37% realized volatility — modeled log-normally with the volatility drag and fat tails priced in, plus uncertainty in the estimate itself, so it widens correctly over longer horizons. Not advice.
Consensus median across 3 analyst price targets. Individual per-firm targets aren’t shown.