Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$58.12
▲ $0.44 (+0.8%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:58 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$6.25B
Day Range
$56.56 - $58.91
52-Week Range
$56.56 - $131.50
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$56.56
Resistance
$79.99
BLDR is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-54.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/31 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
🔴 Bearish
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: $100.82 vs. price $58.12 (+73.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
77/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
+11.4%
Median 40D Outcome
67/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
87%
+2.4% … +12.7%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.9% … +0.9%
🔴 Bearish
7%
-4.2% … -4.2%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 87% (95% CI 62%–96%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +4.4%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
2 occurrence(s) · 100% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.6% | +0.2% … +6.2% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +5.2% | -3.0% … +10.4% | +1.2% |
| 20D | 87% (62%–96%) | +4.4% | +1.8% … +12.4% | +3.0% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +11.4% | +0.3% … +18.6% | +4.5% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +12.5% | -8.8% … +19.6% | +6.7% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-18 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +12.2% | +4.8% |
| 2018-10-23 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +3.0% | +1.8% |
| 2025-11-14 | 74/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +1.2% | +16.6% |
| 2018-12-21 | 73/100 | High Volatility | +12.7% | +22.8% |
| 2026-03-30 | 71/100 | Downtrend | +11.8% | +12.5% |
| 2018-10-05 | 69/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +4.4% | -17.8% |
| 2022-09-15 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +12.8% | +18.2% |
| 2025-03-14 | 67/100 | Downtrend | -4.2% | -7.0% |
| 2025-06-02 | 67/100 | Downtrend | +20.1% | +34.2% |
| 2024-07-05 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +14.7% | +46.2% |
| 2026-06-08 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +1.5% | -13.7% |
| 2024-06-11 | 65/100 | Downtrend | +2.4% | +17.4% |
| 2025-05-07 | 65/100 | Downtrend | +7.0% | +20.9% |
| 2026-05-04 | 64/100 | Downtrend | +2.2% | -10.5% |
| 2026-03-16 | 64/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +0.9% | -14.2% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLI (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
40
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 22, 2026
Then
44
$70.21
Now
40
$58.12
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
26
Quality
42
Value
62
Momentum
13
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
52
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING BLDR...
Recent media coverage of Builders FirstSource has been limited, focusing solely on its removal from the S&P 500 index as part of the quarterly rebalancing effective September 21, 2026. The company, a supplier of building materials and manufactured components to the U.S. residential construction industry, will be replaced by Illumina, a genomic-technology firm. No additional details about Builders FirstSource’s operations or recent developments were provided.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Builders FirstSource. News trend score: 74. Reason: 8 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
34
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
52
Technical
13
Valuation
62
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 sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-28%
Market Narrative
33
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
-2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for BLDR reflects a **narrative-reality gap** (3-point divergence) with no dominant psychological state, indicating a fragmented investor mindset. Herding (38) is the highest score, consistent with peers underperforming today, but negative momentum and valuation gaps dampen extreme bias. Elevated volume (1.37x) and positive sentiment (92/100) suggest speculative activity, yet neutral RSI (42) and muted volatility (0.89x ATR) prevent clear panic or FOMO dominance. The key question: *Is the underperformance structural or temporary?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:27 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Both companies will replace Builders FirstSource and The Trade Desk."
📈 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 — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 6/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock divides methodologies sharply, with some models seeing it as a cautious buy and others flagging it as a high-risk or unattractive proposition. The most bullish approaches—like Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology framework and Howard Marks’ market cycle analysis—suggest it’s not yet in a speculative bubble or late-cycle trap, scoring near the top. Meanwhile, value-focused investors like Benjamin Graham and Walter Bagehot are far more skeptical, with Graham’s enterprising investor variant scoring poorly due to insufficient margin of safety and Bagehot warning of liquidity risks. At the opposite end, trend-following traders like Jesse Livermore and growth purists like Philip Fisher reject it outright, while behavioral economists like Morgan Housel and Thorstein Veblen dismiss it for volatility or speculative motives. The divide reflects a tension between cyclical optimism (high scores) and deep-value or quality concerns (low scores), with no clear middle ground.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 97
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)
🟢 88
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 87
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)
🟢 80
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
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)
🟢 69
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 55
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 41
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 32
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
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)
🔴 30
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 26
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 26
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 13
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 6
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 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
30.4%
Operating Margin
5.2%
Net Margin
2.9%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
10.0%
ROA
3.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.91
Cash
$181.75M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.86
Debt/Equity
1.02
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$58.12
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$100.82
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+73.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $810.62M | $743.69M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $785.29M | $660.96M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $775.47M | $598.81M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $780.32M | $552.80M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $799.83M | $519.83M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$853.28M
Terminal Value
$12.61B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$8.20B
Enterprise Value
$11.27B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$11.27B
*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
$39.36
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$28.65
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
StockStory · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Builders FirstSource (BLDR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
BLDR currently scores 40/100 (Weak) 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, BLDR's estimated fair value is $100.82, which is 73.5% above the current price of $58.12. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BLDR'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: Estimated fair value: $100.82 vs. price $58.12 (+73.5%); Current ratio: 1.86; Current ratio: 1.86.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 5.0% of price; Calmar: -0.32 (3y annualized return -23.6% / max drawdown 72.7%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BLDR.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vance Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 3,366 | +3,366 | — |
| Vaughn Paul | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 3,366 | +3,366 | — |
| O'Brien Matthew Coley | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 7,406 | +7,406 | — |
| Vance Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 42,684 | +3,366 | — |
| Vaughn Paul | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 40,724 | +3,366 | — |
| O'Brien Matthew Coley | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.7.2026 | 7,406 | +7,406 | — |
| Narayan Gayatri | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.6.2026 | 2,842 | -2,842 | $77.77 |
| Narayan Gayatri | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.6.2026 | 28,252 | -2,842 | $77.77 |
| Herron Stephen J | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 850 | -850 | — |
| Herron Stephen J | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 110,260 | -850 | — |
| Hiller Michael | Gift | 4.6.2026 | 900 | -900 | — |
| Hiller Michael | Gift | 4.6.2026 | 52,142 | -900 | — |
| Renz Maria | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 426 | +426 | $76.26 |
| Steinke Craig Arthur | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 491 | +491 | $76.26 |
| Boydston Cory Jacobs | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 409 | +409 | $76.26 |
| OLEARY JAMES | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 491 | +491 | $76.26 |
| CHRISTOPHE CLEVELAND A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 491 | +491 | $76.26 |
| Hayes William B | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 508 | +508 | $76.26 |
| ALEXANDER MARK A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 409 | +409 | $76.26 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 409 | +409 | $76.26 |
| LEVY PAUL S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 1,049 | +1,049 | $76.26 |
| CHRISTOPHE CLEVELAND A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 38,198 | +491 | $76.26 |
| LEVY PAUL S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 1,730,798 | +1,049 | $76.26 |
| OLEARY JAMES | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 91,231 | +491 | $76.26 |
| ALEXANDER MARK A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 47,913 | +409 | $76.26 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
7,829,223 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 8,013,450 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
42.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 38.4% 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