Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$31.85
▲ $0.18 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 02:52 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$7.63B
Day Range
$31.34 - $32.07
52-Week Range
$22.50 - $33.82
Beta
—
Next Earnings
12.11.2026
Support
$29.91
Resistance
$33.82
+35.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/20 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
🔴 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: 25.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $19.41 vs. price $31.85 (-39.0%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (60/100), 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 0 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 0
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
50
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
60
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
41
Risk
50
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
51
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 Central Bancompany, Inc. (CBC) has primarily centered on its financial performance and analyst reactions. The company reported a **16% rise in net income** and a **13-basis-point margin expansion** in Q2 2026 earnings, sparking investor interest. Analysts adjusted their ratings—some downgraded CBC to *Equal-Weight* while others maintained *Overweight* or *Market Perform*—with price targets rising from **$29 to $37**. Additionally, options market activity suggested potential stock volatility, prompting comparisons with rival CFG.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Central Bancompany, Inc.. 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
35
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
51
Technical
41
Valuation
38
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+13%
Market Narrative
67
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests traders are overestimating CBC’s growth potential, as price momentum (+4.3%) far outpaces EPS growth (+0.3%) and trades 70% above intrinsic value. Overconfidence dominates, likely fueled by detached euphoria, while anchoring near resistance hints at reluctance to accept further gains. The key question remains whether fundamentals will justify this valuation gap—or if a correction could reveal overreach. Narrative-reality divergence (gap: 9) may signal mispricing, but no clear catalyst is evident yet.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 03:53 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"analyst Christopher McGratty raises price target from $29 to $32"
"Net income rose 16% while margin expanded 13 basis points"
"CFG vs. CBC: Which Stock Is the Better Value Option?"
"refreshed $100 million buyback authorization"
📈 10D 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 — 86/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast between Peter Lynch’s high score (85) and Benjamin Graham’s Enterprising Investor verdict (6) highlights a fundamental divide in how these methodologies evaluate this stock. Lynch’s enthusiasm stems from perceived undervaluation relative to growth potential—he sees the price as lagging behind the company’s upward trajectory. In contrast, Graham’s frameworks, both defensive and enterprising, reject the stock outright, either for failing core safety metrics or not meeting even the looser valuation thresholds for speculative investors. Meanwhile, methodologies like those of Charles Mackay and Jesse Livermore hover in the middle, with Mackay detecting crowd-driven excitement and Livermore remaining neutral due to unclear trends, while others like Howard Marks and Thorstein Veblen flag mixed signals—either high expectations or ambiguous profit potential. The divergence underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in speculative growth (Lynch) or whether its risks outweigh its rewards (Graham), with the middle-ground approaches struggling to reconcile the conflicting signals.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 86
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 75
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 63
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 60
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 58
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 57
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 45
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 32
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 26
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 10
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 206 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 6 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
$29.91
Range Bottom
$33.82
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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
10.3%
ROA
1.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.75
Cash
$2.06B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 21.8.2026 | $0.120 |
| 22.5.2026 | $0.120 |
| 21.5.2026 | $0.120 |
| 20.2.2026 | $0.120 |
| 19.2.2026 | $0.120 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$31.85
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$19.41
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-39.0%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $254.53M | $233.52M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $275.21M | $231.64M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $292.41M | $225.80M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $305.21M | $216.22M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $312.84M | $203.32M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$231.39M
Terminal Value
$4.93B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$3.21B
Enterprise Value
$4.32B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$4.32B
*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
$17.02
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$15.44
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 24.8.2026
Zacks · 18.8.2026
Yahoo · 18.8.2026
Motley Fool · 11.8.2026
Yahoo · 11.8.2026
Yahoo · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 4.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 4.8.2026
Yahoo · 4.8.2026
ChartMill · 4.8.2026
Central Bancompany, Inc. (CBC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, rated "Moderate" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
CBC currently scores 50/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). 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, CBC's estimated fair value is $19.41, which is 39.0% below the current price of $31.85. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CBC's technical score is 41/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: 25.9%; Net income growth: 27.8%; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $19.41 vs. price $31.85 (-39.0%); Free cash flow growth: -31.6%; Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — CBC 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Westhues Daniel Harold | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 3,868 | +3,868 | — |
| Colbert Jeremy Wayne | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 2,362 | +2,362 | — |
| Goldammer Russell Lee | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.3.2026 | 813 | -813 | — |
| Ciroli James | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 16,285 | +16,285 | — |
| Cook Sam Bryan | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 8,306 | +8,306 | — |
| Goldammer Russell Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 2,647 | +2,647 | — |
| Kellett Scott McKinney | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 4,479 | +4,479 | — |
| Thompson Tristan Antin | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 2,036 | +2,036 | — |
| Schoeneberg Carey Denise | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 1,629 | +1,629 | — |
| Robuck Robert Marion | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 8,761 | +8,761 | — |
| Ross John Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 26,055 | +26,055 | — |
| Hallgren Eric Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 3,257 | +3,257 | — |
| Ciroli James | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 33,285 | +16,285 | — |
| Westhues Daniel Harold | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 113,668 | +3,868 | — |
| Thompson Tristan Antin | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 2,516 | +2,036 | — |
| Schoeneberg Carey Denise | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 8,679 | +1,629 | — |
| Kellett Scott McKinney | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 48,379 | +4,479 | — |
| Hallgren Eric Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 11,307 | +3,257 | — |
| Goldammer Russell Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 22,797 | +2,647 | — |
| Goldammer Russell Lee | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.3.2026 | 21,984 | -813 | — |
| Colbert Jeremy Wayne | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 8,612 | +2,362 | — |
| Ross John Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 171,955 | +26,055 | — |
| Cook Sam Bryan | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 46,925 | +8,306 | — |
| Robuck Robert Marion | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.3.2026 | 85,530 | +8,761 | — |
| Robuck Robert Marion | Z | 1.3.2026 | 9,750 | +9,750 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,159,638 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,748,565 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
66.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 70.0% 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