Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$107.05
▲ $0.93 (+0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/22 02:25 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/22/2026
News analyzed: 09/22/2026
Market Cap
$4.41B
Day Range
$105.70 - $107.62
52-Week Range
$91.05 - $136.37
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$103.99
Resistance
$124.32
BCO is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-6.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/31 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $118.88 vs. price $107.05 (+11.1%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.43 (3y annualized return 13.8% / max drawdown 32.0%)
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
52
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
76
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
26
Risk
42
Sentiment
56
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 **The Brinks Company** has centered on its financial performance and strategic moves. Analysts highlighted steady Q2 earnings, with strong organic growth in ATM Managed Services and Digital Retail Solutions—both exceeding mid-teens growth for over three years. The company’s $6.6 billion acquisition of NCR Atleos faced scrutiny from UK regulators, prompting an antitrust probe. Overall, Brinks is positioned as a resilient player in business services, though some reports caution against assuming long-term sustainability without innovation.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Brinks Company (The). News trend score: 56. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
7
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
56
Technical
26
Valuation
62
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
38
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
-3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a **balanced but cautious stance**, with anchoring (score 29) dominating due to proximity to support (3.6% above). Herding (28) reflects relative outperformance, but weak momentum (-0.3% ROC) and neutral volatility (0.83x ATR) dampen extreme bias. The narrative gap (5 points) hints at mild misalignment between sentiment and fundamentals, yet no clear panic or euphoria emerges. The key question: will traders hold near support or exit if momentum fails to sustain?
Updated: 09/05/2026, 12:19 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"‘mid-teens or better organic revenue growth’ for over three years in AMS and Digital Retail Solutions"
"Record margins and AMS/DRS growth fuel optimism"
"UK regulator opens probe into Brink’s $6.6bn takeover of NCR Atleos"
📈 5D 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
Charles Mackay — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 19/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for BCO reflects a clash between bullish, value-oriented methodologies and more cautious or contrarian approaches. Charles Mackay and Thorstein Veblen’s high scores suggest they’d see this stock as fundamentally sound, with Veblen approving of growth aligned with real value and Mackay spotting no crowd-driven mania. Meanwhile, Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s mid-range score hints at a cyclical opportunity, while Peter Lynch and Howard Marks acknowledge growth but warn that the price may already reflect it—leaving them cautiously mixed. At the other end, Benjamin Graham and his Enterprising Investor variant dismiss it outright, flagging it as too expensive for defensive standards, while Jesse Livermore and Walter Bagehot’s low scores highlight perceived risks—Livermore’s trend aversion and Bagehot’s liquidity concerns. The efficient-market camp and Morgan Housel’s volatility warning further dampen enthusiasm, framing the stock as either unworthy of active selection or prone to shaking out patient investors.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 99
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 81
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 80
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 67
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
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)
🟡 58
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 53
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 43
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 34
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 31
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 22
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 22
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 19
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 8 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 clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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
25.8%
Operating Margin
11.1%
Net Margin
3.8%
EBITDA Margin
16.7%
ROE
71.9%
ROA
2.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.73
Cash
$1.73B
Total Debt
$3.97B
Current Ratio
1.51
Debt/Equity
14.31
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 27.7.2026 | $0.255 |
| 26.7.2026 | $0.255 |
| 18.5.2026 | $0.255 |
| 17.5.2026 | $0.255 |
| 2.2.2026 | $0.255 |
| 1.2.2026 | $0.255 |
| 3.11.2025 | $0.255 |
| 2.11.2025 | $0.255 |
| 28.7.2025 | $0.255 |
| 27.7.2025 | $0.255 |
| 19.5.2025 | $0.255 |
| 18.5.2025 | $0.255 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$107.05
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$118.88
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+11.1%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
5.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5.1% | $458.61M | $420.74M |
| 2 | 4.4% | $478.98M | $403.15M |
| 3 | 3.8% | $497.15M | $383.89M |
| 4 | 3.1% | $512.80M | $363.28M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $525.62M | $341.62M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$436.40M
Terminal Value
$8.29B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.39B
Enterprise Value
$7.30B
Net Debt
$2.25B
Equity Value
$5.05B
*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
$6.53
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$38.18
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 7 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Retail Banker International · 27.8.2026
StockStory · 16.8.2026
Yahoo · 16.8.2026
StockStory · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
Motley Fool · 12.8.2026
Yahoo · 12.8.2026
StockStory · 12.8.2026
Yahoo · 12.8.2026
Zacks · 10.8.2026
Yahoo · 10.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 7.8.2026
Yahoo · 6.8.2026
Brinks Company (The) (BCO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
BCO currently scores 52/100 (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, BCO's estimated fair value is $118.88, which is 11.1% above the current price of $107.05. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BCO's technical score is 26/100, 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: $118.88 vs. price $107.05 (+11.1%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 29.2%; Free cash flow growth: 114.4%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.43 (3y annualized return 13.8% / max drawdown 32.0%); Debt/equity: 14.31; Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — BCO 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cook Kristen Williams | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 729 | -729 | $107.47 |
| BOYNTON PAUL G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 11.35 | +11.35 | $110.02 |
| Galloway Elizabeth A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 6.93 | +6.93 | $110.02 |
| Herling Michael J | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 13.94 | +13.94 | $110.02 |
| Tynan Timothy Joseph | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 21.13 | +21.13 | $110.02 |
| Cook Kristen Williams | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 0.81 | +0.81 | $110.02 |
| Button Adrian | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 0.37 | +0.37 | $110.02 |
| McMaken Kurt B | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 12.76 | +12.76 | $110.02 |
| BOYNTON PAUL G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 73.08 | +73.08 | $110.02 |
| Peschard Mijares Guillermo Eduardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 2.25 | +2.25 | $110.02 |
| Eubanks Richard M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 109.19 | +109.19 | $110.02 |
| McMaken Kurt B | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 53.91 | +53.91 | $108.93 |
| Eubanks Richard M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 109.4 | +109.4 | $108.93 |
| Button Adrian | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 49.73 | +49.73 | $108.93 |
| Galloway Elizabeth A | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 40.25 | +40.25 | $108.93 |
| Cook Kristen Williams | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 39.78 | +39.78 | $108.93 |
| Peschard Mijares Guillermo Eduardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.8.2026 | 52.23 | +52.23 | $108.93 |
| Cook Kristen Williams | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 36.58 | +36.58 | $118.45 |
| Eubanks Richard M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 100.6 | +100.6 | $118.45 |
| Galloway Elizabeth A | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 37.02 | +37.02 | $118.45 |
| McMaken Kurt B | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 49.58 | +49.58 | $118.45 |
| Button Adrian | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 45.73 | +45.73 | $118.45 |
| Peschard Mijares Guillermo Eduardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 48.03 | +48.03 | $118.45 |
| McMaken Kurt B | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 5,546 | +50 | $118.45 |
| Eubanks Richard M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 47,206 | +101 | $118.45 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,827,930 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,654,646 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
78.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 72.0% 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