Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$145.84
▲ $0.39 (+0.3%)
Market data updated: 09/19 02:58 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$7.16B
Day Range
$145.47 - $145.84
52-Week Range
$89.03 - $146.92
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$144.38
Resistance
$145.98
ACA is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+50.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/29 factors positiveRisk: Medium
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 122.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $65.11 vs. price $145.84 (-55.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (65/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
58
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
65
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
64
Risk
64
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
56
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Arcosa, Inc. has centered on its **$8.5 billion acquisition by CRH**, with shareholder approval confirmed on September 4, 2026, following a special meeting. Analysts note the deal increases Arcosa’s exposure to U.S. infrastructure but raises concerns about higher leverage. Additionally, the company reported **strong Q2 2026 earnings**, with steady sales and a notable earnings shift, sparking valuation debates and positive stock performance—up 23.7% in 90 days and 49.8% year-to-date. A recent dividend declaration was also highlighted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Arcosa, Inc.. News trend score: 62. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
98
Fundamentals
56
Technical
64
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+7%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+21
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ACA is dominated by anchoring, where traders appear fixated on the 0.3% proximity to resistance, potentially limiting upside despite a significant valuation premium. Overconfidence (45) hints at traders overweighting recent price stability over fundamentals, while muted FOMO (23) and neutral RSI (59) suggest limited urgency. The key open question is whether the narrative gap (23) will widen if fundamentals diverge further from price action. The absence of panic or herding signals stability, but anchoring may cap upside until resistance is breached or invalidated.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 10:20 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Arcosa’s stockholders approved the acquisition by CRH at its special meeting on September 4, 2026"
"Arcosa’s recent earnings release lands after a strong run in the stock, with the 90-day share price return of 23.69% and year-to-date return of 35.79%"
"Arcosa (ACA) Could Be 1% Undervalued As Valuation Debate Follows Q2 2026 Results"
"Arcosa's $8.5B deal boosts US infrastructure exposure but raises leverage"
📈 17D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Peter Lynch — 87/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 6/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on their documented principles, the model estimates that the high scores from Peter Lynch (87), Gerald M. Loeb (82), Edgar Lawrence Smith (79) and Thorstein Veblen (68) reflect a strong focus on growth, capital‑preservation and real value creation, leading them to view ACA as a growth or long‑term hold candidate. The mid‑range scores from Charles Mackay (63), Walter Bagehot (59), Morgan Housel (55) and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) (51) suggest moderate enthusiasm, noting crowd excitement, adequate liquidity and a neutral position in the market cycle. Scores in the 50‑40 range from Jesse Livermore (50), Howard Marks (46), Samuel Armstrong Nelson (45), Burton Malkiel & John Bogle (44) and Jack Schwager (40) indicate a lack of a clear trend or edge, prompting a stay‑out or mixed view. Finally, the low scores from Philip Fisher (37), Benjamin Graham (Enterprising) (31) and Graham (defensive) (18) underscore their stricter quality and valuation criteria, concluding that ACA does not satisfy their standards for high‑quality growth or defensive safety.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 87
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 82
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 79
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 68
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 59
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 56
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 55
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 46
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 40
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 37
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 36
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 34
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 18
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 6
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 4 bearish · 1 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$144.38
Range Bottom
$145.98
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
22.4%
Operating Margin
11.9%
Net Margin
7.2%
EBITDA Margin
19.6%
ROE
7.9%
ROA
4.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.25
Cash
$214.60M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.20
Debt/Equity
—
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.7.2026 | $0.050 |
| 14.7.2026 | $0.050 |
| 15.4.2026 | $0.050 |
| 14.4.2026 | $0.050 |
| 15.1.2026 | $0.050 |
| 14.1.2026 | $0.050 |
| 15.10.2025 | $0.050 |
| 14.10.2025 | $0.050 |
| 15.7.2025 | $0.050 |
| 14.7.2025 | $0.050 |
| 15.4.2025 | $0.050 |
| 14.4.2025 | $0.050 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$145.84
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$65.11
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-55.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
8.8%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.8% | $190.98M | $175.21M |
| 2 | 7.2% | $204.80M | $172.38M |
| 3 | 5.7% | $216.39M | $167.09M |
| 4 | 4.1% | $225.22M | $159.55M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $230.85M | $150.03M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$175.50M
Terminal Value
$3.64B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.37B
Enterprise Value
$3.19B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$3.19B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$53.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$20.03
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 10 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.9.2026
MT Newswires · 4.9.2026
Business Wire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Business Wire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 17.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
Zacks · 17.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 14.8.2026
Zacks · 7.8.2026
MT Newswires · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Associated Press · 5.8.2026
ChartMill · 5.8.2026
Arcosa, Inc. (ACA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
ACA currently scores 58/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, ACA's estimated fair value is $65.11, which is 55.4% below the current price of $145.84. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ACA's technical score is 64/100, which currently reads as bullish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 122.0%; Net income growth: 122.4%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $65.11 vs. price $145.84 (-55.4%); Free cash flow growth: -43.8%; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — ACA has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carrillo Antonio | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 498,935 | -26,666 | — |
| Trent Melanie Montague | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 17,931 | -2,000 | — |
| Carrillo Antonio | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 26,666 | -26,666 | — |
| Trent Melanie Montague | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 2,000 | -2,000 | — |
| Hurst Eric D | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 3,119 | -2,382 | — |
| Stevenson Bryan | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 37,476 | -6,900 | — |
| Essl Reid S | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 93,264 | -5,950 | — |
| Hurst Eric D | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 2,382 | -2,382 | — |
| Essl Reid S | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 5,950 | -5,950 | — |
| Stevenson Bryan | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 6,900 | -6,900 | — |
| LINDSAY JOHN W | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3 | +3 | $145.29 |
| Carrillo Antonio | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1 | +1 | $145.29 |
| LINDSAY JOHN W | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 7,402 | +3 | $145.29 |
| Carrillo Antonio | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 4,885 | +1 | $145.29 |
| Cole Kerry S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 262 | -262 | $124.14 |
| Hurst Eric D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 17 | -17 | $124.14 |
| Essl Reid S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 2,206 | -2,206 | $124.14 |
| Peck Gail M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 2,600 | -2,600 | $124.14 |
| Peck Gail M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 85,692 | -2,600 | $124.14 |
| Hurst Eric D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 5,501 | -17 | $124.14 |
| Essl Reid S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 99,214 | -2,206 | $124.14 |
| Cole Kerry S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 27,487 | -262 | $124.14 |
| LINDSAY JOHN W | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 1,087 | +1,087 | — |
| ALVARADO JOSEPH | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 1,087 | +1,087 | — |
| Lubel Kimberly S | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 1,087 | +1,087 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,259,660 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 821,007 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.8% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology