Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$11.27
▼ $0.18 (-1.6%)
Market data updated: 09/20 11:56 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$915.05M
Day Range
$11.19 - $11.42
52-Week Range
$9.55 - $14.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$11.19
Resistance
$13.08
ACEL is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+1.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/30 factors positiveRisk: High
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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
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: 46.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.4% / max drawdown 26.0%)
Risk
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
49
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
73
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
13
Risk
42
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
46
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Accel Entertainment, Inc. has primarily focused on its stock performance and market positioning within the consumer discretionary sector. Wells Fargo initiated coverage in August 2026 with an equal-weight rating and a $14 price target, reflecting cautious optimism amid broader economic uncertainty. Analysts note the company’s vulnerability as a small-cap stock in the volatile Russell 2000 index, alongside broader industry trends showing flat returns for consumer discretionary stocks despite market gains. No company-specific operational or financial updates were highlighted beyond this analytical perspective.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Accel Entertainment, Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
86
Fundamentals
46
Technical
13
Valuation
50
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-13%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+20
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior (score 61) reflects traders’ fixation on the stock’s 2.0% proximity to support, likely using this as a psychological anchor. The narrative gap (20 points) suggests traders overestimate positive fundamentals relative to recent price action. Loss aversion (37) hints at hesitation to sell amid losses, while overconfidence (13) may stem from a +14% DCF premium despite weak momentum. The key question: will traders break free from anchoring if support is tested, or will loss aversion reinforce holding near the 2.0% threshold?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:59 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Wells Fargo initiates coverage of Accel Entertainment (ACEL) with Equal-Weight Recommendation"
"Over the past six months, it seems like demand trends may be working against [consumer discretionary] businesses"
"Accel Entertainment benefits from above-sector median EBITDA growth"
📈 15D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 15/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish growth-oriented signals and cautious or outright bearish assessments. Peter Lynch, Charles Mackay, and Thorstein Veblen all score above 70, viewing ACEL as a growth candidate—Lynch believes the stock’s price hasn’t yet reflected its potential, while Veblen sees real value creation behind its trajectory. In contrast, the value and defensive investors—like Benjamin Graham (scoring 27) and Edgar Lawrence Smith (33)—reject it outright, citing a lack of stability or statistical cheapness. Meanwhile, mid-cycle or neutral methodologies (Samuel Armstrong Nelson, Walter Bagehot, and Howard Marks) hover around 47–62, suggesting neither a strong buy nor a clear sell, though Marks warns expectations may already be high. The extreme divergence—from Livermore’s 17 (failing his trend-following rule) to Lynch’s 76—reflects whether the stock’s momentum or fundamentals are prioritized, with no clear consensus beyond cautious optimism from a few.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 76
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 61
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 54
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 52
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 49
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 44
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)
🟡 42
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 34
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 30
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 15
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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.
The stock is in a clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Medium confidence
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
—
Operating Margin
8.1%
Net Margin
3.9%
EBITDA Margin
12.1%
ROE
19.1%
ROA
4.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.61
Cash
$296.57M
Total Debt
$607.42M
Current Ratio
2.61
Debt/Equity
2.25
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$11.27
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$10.17
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-9.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
11.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.3% | $68.97M | $63.28M |
| 2 | 9.1% | $75.26M | $63.35M |
| 3 | 6.9% | $80.46M | $62.13M |
| 4 | 4.7% | $84.25M | $59.69M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $86.36M | $56.13M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$61.95M
Terminal Value
$1.36B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$885.07M
Enterprise Value
$1.19B
Net Debt
$310.85M
Equity Value
$878.78M
*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
$3.12
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.36
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 10 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
StockStory · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
StockStory · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Zacks · 24.8.2026
Fintel · 22.8.2026
MT Newswires · 21.8.2026
Benzinga · 21.8.2026
StockStory · 19.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 5.8.2026
MarketBeat · 5.8.2026
Zacks · 4.8.2026
Associated Press · 4.8.2026
Accel Entertainment, Inc. (ACEL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
ACEL currently scores 49/100 (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, ACEL's estimated fair value is $10.17, which is 9.7% below the current price of $11.27. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ACEL's technical score is 13/100, which currently reads as bearish — 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: 46.3%; Net income growth: 46.0%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.4% / max drawdown 26.0%); Debt/equity: 2.25; Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ACEL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 335,516 | +335,516 | — |
| Phelan Mark T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 55,229 | +55,229 | — |
| Phelan Mark T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 55,229 | +55,229 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 335,516 | +335,516 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Disposition to the Company | 7.8.2026 | 173,416 | -173,416 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 346,831 | +346,831 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 7.8.2026 | 151,219 | -151,219 | $12.16 |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 346,831 | -346,831 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 4,204,774 | +346,831 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 7.8.2026 | 4,053,555 | -151,219 | $12.16 |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Disposition to the Company | 7.8.2026 | 0 | -173,416 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 173,416 | -346,831 | — |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | $12.64 |
| Rubenstein Andrew H. | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 3,857,943 | -15,000 | $12.64 |
| Harmer Derek | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 13,333 | -13,333 | — |
| Harmer Derek | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 3,907 | -3,907 | $12.31 |
| Harmer Derek | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 13,333 | +13,333 | — |
| Harmer Derek | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 201,160 | +13,333 | — |
| Harmer Derek | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 197,253 | -3,907 | $12.31 |
| Harmer Derek | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 0 | -13,333 | — |
| Levin Scott D | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.7.2026 | 16,222 | +16,222 | — |
| Summerer Brett Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.7.2026 | 4,629 | +4,629 | — |
| Summerer Brett Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.7.2026 | 6,612 | +6,612 | — |
| Phelan Mark T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.7.2026 | 41,313 | +41,313 | — |
| Levin Scott D | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.7.2026 | 24,956 | +24,956 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,292,377 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,169,562 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 33.4% 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