Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$116.98
▼ $0.51 (-0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 07:28 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$8.57B
Day Range
$116.03 - $117.76
52-Week Range
$99.16 - $132.17
Beta
—
Next Earnings
23.10.2026
Support
$113.92
Resistance
$126.90
ALV is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-7.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/32 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
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $143.33 vs. price $116.98 (+22.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.18 (3y annualized return 7.1% / max drawdown 40.5%)
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
53
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
73
$123.97
Now
53
$116.98
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
70
Quality
58
Value
67
Momentum
16
Risk
42
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
62
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 **Autoliv, Inc.** has centered on its technological advancements in automotive safety, particularly the development of **virtual crash testing** and its collaboration with **Toyota** as the first customer. Analysts also noted a **downgrade from "Buy" to "Hold"** by TD Cowen, adjusting the price target downward, while discussions about the company’s **efficiency, fair value, and shareholder returns** persisted. No unrelated corporate activity (like the Enersense or Alvopetro mentions) pertains to Autoliv.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Autoliv, Inc.. News trend score: 80. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
12
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
62
Technical
16
Valuation
67
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-1%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixating on the 1.4% gap below resistance, ignoring valuation discrepancies (-17% vs. DCF). FOMO (32) and euphoria (11) are present but muted by the stock’s underperformance relative to peers and fundamentals. The narrative gap (8) hints at a disconnect between optimistic sentiment (80/100) and valuation realities. Key question: Will traders break the resistance anchor, or will the valuation gap widen further?
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:04 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"TD Cowen Downgrades Autoliv to Hold From Buy, Adjusts Price Target to $137 From $148"
"Autoliv (ALV) Efficiency Story Keeps Fair Value In Focus"
"Autoliv Advances Development of Virtual Crash Tests, Recruiting Toyota as First Customer"
📈 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 — 89/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 25/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on his documented principles, the model estimates that Charles Mackay and Samuel Armstrong Nelson view the stock favorably, seeing limited crowd mania and a cycle that is closer to oversold, which yields higher scores. In contrast, more conservative investors such as Benjamin Graham and Gerald M. Loeb assign low scores, noting that the stock fails defensive criteria and presents moderate to high risk, aligning with their strict safety standards. Investors like Howard Marks and Peter Lynch occupy a middle ground, acknowledging reasonable risk or mixed pricing, which explains their intermediate scores. Overall, the divergent conclusions arise because each methodology emphasizes different signals—crowd behavior, cycle timing, intrinsic value, and risk tolerance—leading to a wide spread of estimates.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 89
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 83
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)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 66
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 64
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 64
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 59
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 54
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 48
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 44
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 40
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 38
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 29
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 25
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
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 9 bearish · 2 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$113.92
Range Bottom
$126.90
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
19.2%
Operating Margin
10.1%
Net Margin
6.8%
EBITDA Margin
13.8%
ROE
28.6%
ROA
8.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$9.59
Cash
$604.00M
Total Debt
$2.15B
Current Ratio
1.05
Debt/Equity
0.84
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 28.8.2026 | $0.870 |
| 20.5.2026 | $0.870 |
| 19.5.2026 | $0.870 |
| 4.3.2026 | $0.870 |
| 3.3.2026 | $0.870 |
| 5.9.2025 | $0.850 |
| 4.9.2025 | $0.850 |
| 21.5.2025 | $0.700 |
| 20.5.2025 | $0.700 |
| 7.3.2025 | $0.700 |
| 6.3.2025 | $0.700 |
| 3.12.2024 | $0.700 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$116.98
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$143.33
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+22.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.2% | $767.90M | $704.50M |
| 2 | 6.1% | $814.45M | $685.51M |
| 3 | 4.9% | $854.16M | $659.56M |
| 4 | 3.7% | $885.65M | $627.42M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $907.79M | $590.00M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$716.00M
Terminal Value
$14.32B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$9.30B
Enterprise Value
$12.57B
Net Debt
$1.55B
Equity Value
$11.02B
*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
$33.45
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$15.42
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 11 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Energy Monitor · 7.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Autoliv, Inc. (ALV) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 53/100, 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.
ALV currently scores 53/100 (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, ALV's estimated fair value is $143.33, which is 22.5% above the current price of $116.98. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ALV's technical score is 16/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $143.33 vs. price $116.98 (+22.5%); Free cash flow growth: 49.2%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.18 (3y annualized return 7.1% / max drawdown 40.5%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — ALV 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carlson Jan | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 19,607 | -19,607 | $130.00 |
| Carlson Jan | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 60,000 | -19,607 | $130.00 |
| Hagstrom Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 0.992 | +0.992 | — |
| Hagstrom Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 2.398 | +2.398 | — |
| Hagstrom Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 1.004 | +1.004 | — |
| Hagstrom Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 1.57 | +1.57 | — |
| JADEMYR PER JONAS | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 2.737 | +2.737 | — |
| Hagstrom Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 1.21 | +1.21 | — |
| JADEMYR PER JONAS | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 3.392 | +3.392 | — |
| JADEMYR PER JONAS | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 4.375 | +4.375 | — |
| JADEMYR PER JONAS | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 2.998 | +2.998 | — |
| JADEMYR PER JONAS | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 7.136 | +7.136 | — |
| Fox Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 9.213 | +9.213 | — |
| Fox Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 6.152 | +6.152 | — |
| Fox Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 6.481 | +6.481 | — |
| Fox Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 7.135 | +7.135 | — |
| Fox Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 15.424 | +15.424 | — |
| Dumont Fabien | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 3.568 | +3.568 | — |
| Dumont Fabien | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 3.072 | +3.072 | — |
| Dumont Fabien | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 1.286 | +1.286 | — |
| Dumont Fabien | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 3.061 | +3.061 | — |
| Dumont Fabien | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 4.602 | +4.602 | — |
| Swahn Christian | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 2.737 | +2.737 | — |
| Swahn Christian | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 3.392 | +3.392 | — |
| Swahn Christian | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.6.2026 | 2.998 | +2.998 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,845,016 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,952,697 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 74.6% 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