Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Miscellaneous · ·
$214.43
▲ $0.17 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:48 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$41.48B
Day Range
$213.04 - $215.38
52-Week Range
$212.82 - $271.64
Beta
—
Next Earnings
22.09.2026
Support
$212.82
Resistance
$267.84
-6.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/30 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
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
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
51
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
56
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
21
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
65
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 coverage highlights Ferguson Enterprises' stock performance and analyst sentiment, with Wolfe Research assigning a Peer Perform rating while Zacks upgraded the stock to a Buy. Analysts note the company has lagged the industrial sector but maintain optimism about earnings. Additionally, Ferguson completed its acquisition of FloWorks, expanding its valve and flow‑control distribution capabilities. No other major events were reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ferguson Enterprises Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
85
Fundamentals
65
Technical
21
Valuation
50
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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.
Price (3M)
-10%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+26
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests **Herding** dominates as FERG’s outperformance relative to peers (+2.3% vs. +1.2%) aligns with sector momentum, despite weak technical signals. The narrative gap (21-point divergence) hints at overestimation of positive developments, while neutral volatility and modest volume rule out panic or euphoria extremes. Key open question: Will the stock sustain relative strength, or will fading momentum (-6.1% ROC) trigger a reversion to mean? The absence of overconfidence or anchoring bias implies no extreme positioning, but the 100/100 sentiment may mask underlying caution.
Updated: 09/05/2026, 10:51 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Morgan Stanley raises Ferguson Enterprises price target to $295 from $290"
"Seth Klarman’s Baupost Group holds Ferguson Enterprises"
"Whales are entities with large sums of money and we track their transactions here at Benzinga"
"Yesterday morning, we got an excellent quarter from Ferguson. That’s the North American distributor of building products"
📈 8D 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
Philip Fisher — 16/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that cycle‑focused thinkers such as Samuel Armstrong Nelson (score 97) view the stock as favorably positioned, while value‑oriented analysts like Benjamin Graham (score 24) deem it insufficiently cheap and failing defensive tests. Investors emphasizing market sentiment and liquidity, like Charles Mackay (76) and Walter Bagehot (41), see moderate but not compelling cases, whereas those weighing growth quality, such as Philip Fisher (16) and Peter Lynch (21), find the stock lacking the required growth‑at‑reasonable‑price or quality signatures. Mid‑range scores from Howard Marks, Jack Schwager, and Thorstein Veblen reflect mixed assessments, acknowledging a decent business but concerns about expectations, profitability, or trend alignment. This spread of scores explains why the historical methodologies arrive at a wide range of conclusions, from optimistic cycle‑based views to cautious or negative fundamental evaluations.
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)
🟢 76
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)
🟡 64
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 59
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
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)
🟡 55
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 52
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 50
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
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
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 27
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 24
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 21
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 21
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 16
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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 (1 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.
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
30.7%
Operating Margin
8.5%
Net Margin
6.0%
EBITDA Margin
9.7%
ROE
31.8%
ROA
10.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$9.33
Cash
$674.00M
Total Debt
$4.15B
Current Ratio
1.68
Debt/Equity
0.71
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 | $0.890 |
| 15.5.2026 | $0.890 |
| 14.5.2026 | $0.890 |
| 6.3.2026 | $0.890 |
| 5.3.2026 | $0.890 |
| 2.1.2026 | $0.890 |
| 1.1.2026 | $0.890 |
| 26.9.2025 | $0.830 |
| 25.9.2025 | $0.830 |
| 20.6.2025 | $0.830 |
| 19.6.2025 | $0.830 |
| 21.3.2025 | $0.830 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$29.28
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$13.26
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 4 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
MT Newswires · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Barchart · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Zacks · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Business Wire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 20.8.2026
MT Newswires · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 18.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.8.2026
MT Newswires · 17.8.2026
Benzinga · 15.8.2026
Ferguson Enterprises Inc. (FERG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
FERG currently scores 51/100 (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.
FERG's technical score is 21/100, 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Return on equity (ROE): 31.8% — strong; Current ratio: 1.68.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: 0.34 (3y annualized return 11.7% / max drawdown 33.9%); Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — FERG 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 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schlicher Jake | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 5,177 | -5,177 | $230.92 |
| Baker Kelly A | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 4.005 | +4.005 | $224.20 |
| METCALF JAMES S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 7.324 | +7.324 | $224.20 |
| Paisley James A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 2.858 | +2.858 | $224.19 |
| METCALF JAMES S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 17.42 | +17.42 | $222.60 |
| Halligan Catherine Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 7.309 | +7.309 | $224.20 |
| METCALF JAMES S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 6,960 | +7 | $224.20 |
| METCALF JAMES S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 6,978 | +17 | $222.60 |
| Halligan Catherine Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 3,959 | +7 | $224.20 |
| Paisley James A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 4,458 | +3 | $224.19 |
| Baker Kelly A | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 3,962 | +4 | $224.20 |
| Baker Kelly A | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 1.469 | +1.469 | $220.62 |
| Halligan Catherine Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 3.743 | +3.743 | $221.19 |
| Halligan Catherine Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 3,951 | +4 | $221.19 |
| Baker Kelly A | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 3,958 | +1 | $220.62 |
| Camposano Robert Anthony Jr. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 68 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Schlicher Jake | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 68 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Stirrup Allison | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 136 | +136 | $132.23 |
| Brundage William | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 68 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Thees William T. Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 68 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Murphy Kevin Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 68 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Thees William T. Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 32,680 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Schlicher Jake | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 14,667 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Brundage William | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 57,719 | +68 | $132.23 |
| Murphy Kevin Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.5.2026 | 177,499 | +68 | $132.23 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,573,017 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,792,984 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
50.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.8% 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