Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Utilities · ·
$388.55
▲ $7.63 (+2.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 11:42 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$13.92B
Day Range
$384.02 - $395.00
52-Week Range
$354.41 - $748.89
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$373.70
Resistance
$603.09
FN is a stock from the Utilities sector — Electricity, water, and residential gas — steady demand and heavy regulation, considered a defensive, dividend-paying sector.
+2.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/28 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 35.7%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $2.75 vs. price $388.55 (-99.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), 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 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
54
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
68
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
34
Risk
48
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
57
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 media coverage on Fabrinet has highlighted its potential as an overlooked AI infrastructure stock, with a notable mention in First Pacific Advisors’ *FPA Queens Road Small Cap Value Fund* investor letter, which cited the company as part of its strong first-half 2026 performance. While Fabrinet itself isn’t directly discussed in the provided headlines, the broader context revolves around AI-related firms, premium valuations, and growth in data center and hyperscaler sectors—suggesting indirect relevance to Fabrinet’s positioning in tech manufacturing and supply chain. The sources are limited, so no deeper details on Fabrinet’s recent activities are available.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Fabrinet. News trend score: 98. Reason: 11 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
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
79
Fundamentals
57
Technical
34
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
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 (3M)
-32%
Market Narrative
72
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+31
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant **Loss Aversion** (84) reflects a defensive stance after a 26.3% drop, with subdued volume (0.69x avg) signaling caution. Despite extreme positive sentiment (100/100) and valuation disconnects (+15054% vs. DCF), momentum (-3.8% ROC) and peer underperformance dampen euphoric or herd-driven behavior. The key tension lies between narrative optimism (72) and reality (41), where investors may cling to gains while avoiding further losses. The open question: Will sentiment sustain despite persistent underperformance?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:01 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"FN's AI Optical Growth Accelerates: Can It Challenge LITE & AAOI?"
"AI-optics growth and rising estimates support upside, but premium valuation... raise[s] execution risk."
"Fabrinet has outperformed the market over the past 5 years by 19.97% on an annualized basis."
"Fabrinet (FN): A Hidden AI Infrastructure Stock to Watch"
📈 11D 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 — 91/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Nelson’s documented cycle principles, the model estimates the stock is closer to oversold than overbought, giving it a high score. Similarly, Lynch’s growth focus and Marks’s (Market Cycle) view both support a positive assessment, resulting in strong scores for those investors. However, Howard Marks’s valuation caution, Benjamin Graham’s defensive criteria, and Morgan Housel’s focus on volatility assign low scores, indicating risk and lack of safety. These differences arise because each methodology weights price momentum, growth potential, and safety metrics differently.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 91
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)
🟢 89
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)
🟢 79
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 65
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 65
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 57
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 43
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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)
🔴 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 15
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)
🔴 0
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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.
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
12.0%
Operating Margin
10.0%
Net Margin
10.2%
EBITDA Margin
11.4%
ROE
19.3%
ROA
12.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$13.21
Cash
$346.71M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.25
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$388.55
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$2.75
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-99.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
21.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 21.1% | $5.11M | $4.69M |
| 2 | 16.5% | $5.95M | $5.01M |
| 3 | 11.8% | $6.66M | $5.14M |
| 4 | 7.2% | $7.13M | $5.05M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $7.31M | $4.75M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$4.22M
Terminal Value
$115.30M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$74.94M
Enterprise Value
$99.59M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$99.59M
*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
$67.70
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$67.63
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 6 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Trefis · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Zacks · 3.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 1.9.2026
Fabrinet (FN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
FN currently scores 54/100 (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, FN's estimated fair value is $2.75, which is 99.3% below the current price of $388.55. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
FN's technical score is 34/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 35.7%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 42.3%; Net income growth: 42.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $2.75 vs. price $388.55 (-99.3%); ATR: 6.5% of price; Free cash flow growth: -98.0%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for FN.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Archer Edward T. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 1,420 | -1,420 | $385.58 |
| Archer Edward T. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 1,080 | -1,080 | $386.34 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 16,772 | -321 | $421.14 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 20,039 | -1,840 | $421.14 |
| Archer Edward T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 9,507 | -849 | $421.14 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 48,467 | -2,943 | $421.14 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 2,943 | -2,943 | $421.14 |
| Archer Edward T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 849 | -849 | $421.14 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 321 | -321 | $421.14 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 1,840 | -1,840 | $421.14 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 17,093 | -217 | $436.67 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 21,879 | -1,168 | $436.67 |
| Archer Edward T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 10,356 | -550 | $436.67 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 51,410 | -1,821 | $436.67 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 1,168 | -1,168 | $436.67 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 217 | -217 | $436.67 |
| Archer Edward T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 550 | -550 | $436.67 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.8.2026 | 1,821 | -1,821 | $436.67 |
| Archer Edward T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 10,906 | -546 | $436.67 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 17,310 | -213 | $436.67 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 53,231 | -2,044 | $436.67 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 23,047 | -1,123 | $436.67 |
| Gill Harpal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 1,123 | -1,123 | $436.67 |
| Grady Seamus | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 2,044 | -2,044 | $436.67 |
| Sverha Csaba | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 213 | -213 | $436.67 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,518,703 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,659,977 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
42.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 47.6% 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