Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Materials · ·
$86.15
▼ $0.55 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 06:03 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$57.31B
Day Range
$85.59 - $86.46
52-Week Range
$85.47 - $131.55
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$85.47
Resistance
$106.38
CRH is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
-23.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/31 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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 20.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $51.34 vs. price $86.15 (-40.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (64/100), 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.
88/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+5.4%
Median 40D Outcome
45/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+10.0% … +15.3%
🟡 Base
7%
+1.0% … +1.0%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-9.6% … -3.3%
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, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +4.7%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
4 occurrence(s) · 75% 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 | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.3% | -0.5% … +5.3% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.3% | -1.8% … +11.4% | +0.8% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +4.7% | -3.4% … +11.6% | +1.3% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.4% | +1.2% … +14.8% | +2.8% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +7.7% | -2.5% … +18.3% | +3.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-14 | 88/100 | Downtrend | +10.2% | +21.2% |
| 2022-09-14 | 80/100 | Downtrend | -9.9% | +11.2% |
| 2022-06-30 | 80/100 | Downtrend | +10.8% | -8.4% |
| 2018-10-26 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +1.0% | +4.3% |
| 2022-09-29 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +9.5% | +24.0% |
| 2022-04-11 | 73/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -2.2% | -10.5% |
| 2018-11-20 | 71/100 | Downtrend | -8.6% | +15.4% |
| 2022-06-15 | 70/100 | Downtrend | -3.6% | +5.6% |
| 2022-05-12 | 69/100 | Downtrend | -3.1% | +0.8% |
| 2022-07-15 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +14.0% | -6.0% |
| 2022-08-30 | 67/100 | Consolidation | -12.8% | +7.7% |
| 2022-10-14 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +26.6% | +39.7% |
| 2024-07-02 | 65/100 | Consolidation | +18.9% | +29.4% |
| 2026-06-10 | 65/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +4.7% | -5.7% |
| 2026-03-30 | 64/100 | Downtrend | +12.3% | +10.9% |
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 XLB (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
46
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
64
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
9
Risk
48
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
65
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING CRH...
Recent media coverage of **CRH plc** has centered on its $8.5 billion acquisition of **Arcosa, Inc.**, a U.S.-based infrastructure solutions provider, which was approved by Arcosa shareholders in early September 2026. Analysts note the deal expands CRH’s exposure to U.S. non-residential construction and infrastructure, though concerns about increased leverage have led some to rate the stock a **Hold**. Broader industry trends, including rising demand for construction materials, are also highlighted as potential growth drivers.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about CRH plc. 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
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
84
Fundamentals
65
Technical
9
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-23%
Market Narrative
60
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+19
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
CRH’s psychology is dominated by **overconfidence** (45), driven by a massive DCF premium (+76%) despite weak momentum and underperformance vs. earnings growth. The **euphoria** score (35) reflects extreme sentiment (100/100) and valuation disconnect, while **anchoring** (14) and **loss aversion** (15) hint at defensive positioning near support. The **narrative gap** (35) suggests traders overestimate fundamentals relative to price action. The key question: *Is the premium justified by future growth, or will reality (e.g., earnings) force a re-evaluation?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 10:38 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Arcosa's $8.5B deal boosts US infrastructure exposure"
"DA Davidson initiates coverage of CRH with Buy Recommendation"
📈 12D 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 — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 29/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a deep split between methodologies prioritizing cyclical timing and those focused on fundamental strength or market efficiency. At the top, Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score and verdict suggest CRH sits in a favorable cycle phase, closer to oversold than overbought, while Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) also see it as a disciplined, early-to-mid-cycle opportunity with balanced risk/reward. Meanwhile, the lower-scoring approaches—particularly Graham’s defensive framework, Livermore’s trend-following rules, and the efficient-market view—flag red flags, either because the stock lacks statistical cheapness, contradicts prevailing trends, or fails to justify active selection over passive indexing. The middle-ground methodologies (like Fisher, Housel, or Mackay) acknowledge some merit but temper enthusiasm with concerns about crowd behavior, growth sustainability, or moderate risk, illustrating a tension between cyclical optimism and cautionary fundamental or behavioral signals.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 98
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
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)
🟢 83
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 73
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟡 63
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 62
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 58
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
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
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 46
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 39
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 38
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 37
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)
🔴 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
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 · 11 bearish · 0 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
36.1%
Operating Margin
14.5%
Net Margin
10.0%
EBITDA Margin
20.3%
ROE
15.6%
ROA
6.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$5.54
Cash
$4.10B
Total Debt
$17.53B
Current Ratio
1.74
Debt/Equity
0.73
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $0.390 |
| 15.5.2026 | $0.390 |
| 14.5.2026 | $0.390 |
| 6.3.2026 | $0.390 |
| 5.3.2026 | $0.390 |
| 23.5.2025 | $0.370 |
| 22.5.2025 | $0.370 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.370 |
| 13.3.2025 | $0.370 |
| 22.11.2024 | $0.350 |
| 21.11.2024 | $0.350 |
| 23.8.2024 | $0.350 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$86.15
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$51.34
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-40.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.6% | $3.05B | $2.79B |
| 2 | 4.1% | $3.17B | $2.67B |
| 3 | 3.6% | $3.28B | $2.54B |
| 4 | 3.0% | $3.38B | $2.40B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $3.47B | $2.25B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$2.91B
Terminal Value
$54.69B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$35.54B
Enterprise Value
$48.19B
Net Debt
$13.44B
Equity Value
$34.76B
*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
$35.46
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$13.08
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
MT Newswires · 4.9.2026
Business Wire · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 30.8.2026
TipRanks · 30.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
CRH plc (CRH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 46/100, 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.
CRH currently scores 46/100 (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, CRH's estimated fair value is $51.34, which is 40.4% below the current price of $86.15. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CRH's technical score is 9/100, 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: Free cash flow growth: 20.8%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 1.74.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $51.34 vs. price $86.15 (-40.4%); Calmar: 0.49 (3y annualized return 17.1% / max drawdown 34.6%); Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — CRH 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ORiordain Padraig | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 1,492 | -1,492 | $104.45 |
| ORiordain Padraig | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 1,205 | -1,492 | $104.45 |
| Lake Randy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 6,294 | -6,294 | — |
| Lake Randy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 2,843 | -2,843 | $108.75 |
| Lake Randy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 6,381 | +6,381 | — |
| Rhinehart Mary K | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 1,556 | +1,556 | — |
| Rhinehart Mary K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 1,976 | -1,976 | — |
| McKay Lamar | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 1,556 | +1,556 | — |
| Rhinehart Mary K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,004 | +2,004 | — |
| Rhinehart Mary K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 962 | -962 | $108.75 |
| McKay Lamar | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 1,976 | -1,976 | — |
| McKay Lamar | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 962 | -962 | $108.75 |
| McKay Lamar | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,004 | +2,004 | — |
| Peck Thomas R Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 17,988 | +17,988 | — |
| Peck Thomas R Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 21,622 | +21,622 | — |
| Lane Kristin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,195 | -2,195 | — |
| Lane Kristin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 876 | -876 | $108.75 |
| Lane Kristin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,225 | +2,225 | — |
| Mintern Denis James | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 14,985 | -14,985 | — |
| Mintern Denis James | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 7,932 | -7,932 | $109.29 |
| Mintern Denis James | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 15,194 | +15,194 | — |
| San Agustin Juan Pablo | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,708 | -2,708 | — |
| San Agustin Juan Pablo | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.5.2026 | 1,247 | -1,247 | $110.43 |
| San Agustin Juan Pablo | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.5.2026 | 2,745 | +2,745 | — |
| Bryan Aylwyn | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 5,407 | +5,407 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
12,699,450 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 14,262,333 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
25.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 23.1% 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