Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Utilities · ·
$42.53
▼ $0.70 (-1.6%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:38 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$42.12 - $43.32
52-Week Range
$33.33 - $48.07
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$38.24
Resistance
$44.53
GFL is a stock from the Utilities sector — Electricity, water, and residential gas — steady demand and heavy regulation, considered a defensive, dividend-paying sector.
-7.8% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 8/13 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
🟢 Bullish
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.23 (3y annualized return 8.2% / max drawdown 35.0%)
Risk
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.
GFL Environmental (GFL) achieves an **investorScore of 82**, reflecting a **STRONG** overall rating driven primarily by robust technical performance and positive analyst sentiment. The stock demonstrates strong momentum, with its price consistently trading above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, alongside a **bullish MACD histogram** and an **RSI of 64.0**, indicating healthy upward momentum. However, the **%K value of 97.3** signals overbought conditions, a technical red flag that could suggest near-term consolidation. Analyst coverage is overwhelmingly positive, with Scotiabank and Barclays reinforcing sector outperformance and raising price targets, while recent index adjustments and acquisitions (e.g., SECURE Waste Infrastructure) underscore institutional confidence. Despite these strengths, **risk metrics remain a significant concern**, particularly the **35% historical drawdown** and **0.30 volatility ratio**, which highlight potential downside volatility. The **ATR of 2.8%** further emphasizes short-term price volatility, a critical factor for risk-averse investors.
The stock exhibits strong bullish momentum with price above both 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and an RSI of 64.0, though it is currently overbought (%K = 97.3).
These technical indicators suggest short-term strength but also potential overbought exhaustion, which could lead to a pullback.
Analysts maintain a positive outlook, with Scotiabank and Barclays raising price targets, while index changes and acquisitions (e.g., SECURE Waste Infrastructure) reflect institutional support.
Positive analyst sentiment and strategic acquisitions strengthen long-term investor confidence in GFL’s growth trajectory.
The stock exhibits high volatility (ATR = 2.8%) and a historical maximum drawdown of 35% over three years, indicating significant downside risk.
These risk factors suggest potential for sharp corrections, which could impact short-term investors or those sensitive to volatility.
StockIQ conclusion
GFL Environmental demonstrates **strong technical and analyst-driven momentum**, supported by institutional confidence and strategic acquisitions. However, **high volatility and overbought conditions** introduce meaningful risk, particularly for short-term investors. While the stock’s **STRONG rating (82)** reflects its current strength, the **moderate risk score (42)** highlights the need for caution. Long-term investors may find value in its growth potential, but volatility and technical exhaustion remain key watchpoints.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
as of 09/10/202677
This Week
82
7D Ago
↓ -5
Weakening
Technical
76
7D Ago: 86
↓ -10
News
98
7D Ago: 86
↑ +12
Risk
42
7D Ago: 50
↓ -8
Biggest Improvements
Biggest Declines
📊 Score History
77
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
10d ago · $42.00
Evidence: -3.7pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
10d ago · $42.00
Evidence: 9 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
11d ago · $42.98
Evidence: 10 bullish / 0 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
15d ago · $43.73
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
15d ago · $43.31
Evidence: 10 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
16d ago · $43.48
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 21 to 48 day-over-day
What happened after
16d ago · $43.26
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
17d ago · $43.07
Evidence: +3.8pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
17d ago · $43.07
Evidence: attention score 65/100
What happened after
17d ago · $43.07
Evidence: 10 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
19d ago · $42.29
Evidence: +3.9pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
19d ago · $42.29
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
⚖️ Base Case
77 / 100
🐻 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 26, 2026
Then
71
$40.72
Now
77
$42.53
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
76
Risk
42
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
No data available
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 GFL Environmental Inc. has centered on its **acquisition of SECURE Waste Infrastructure**, finalized in early September 2026 after months of negotiations, including discussions about potential take-private bids. Analysts from Scotiabank and Barclays have also **upgraded their ratings** and raised price targets to $57 and $58 respectively, signaling positive market sentiment. The deal led to SECURE’s removal from the S&P/TSX Composite Index as GFL expanded its waste management footprint.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about GFL Environmental Inc. Subordinate voting shares, no par value. News trend score: 98. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
41
Fundamentals
—
Technical
76
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price (3M)
+21%
Market Narrative
66
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+16
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior reflects traders’ fixation on the 2.7% resistance gap, despite positive momentum and euphoric positioning. FOMO and euphoria coexist, but the narrative-reality gap (13 points) hints at potential overestimation of tailwinds. The key question is whether traders will break free from resistance or double down, given the disconnect between optimistic sentiment and modest overbought conditions. Herding remains absent, suggesting no peer-driven momentum to sustain the rally.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 10:09 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Scotiabank analyst Konark Gupta raises price target from $56 to $57"
"Barclays reinstates GFL Environmental with an Overweight rating"
"GFL Environmental closes the acquisition of SECURE Waste Infrastructure Corp."
"SECURE Waste Infrastructure removed from S&P/TSX Composite Index"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 14D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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
Charles Mackay — 62/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 27/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with some models seeing clear opportunities while others flag significant risks. Jesse Livermore’s high score (71) suggests the stock aligns with his trend-following approach, where price momentum is the primary signal. Meanwhile, Charles Mackay’s moderate score (55) hints at speculative crowd behavior, while Jack Schwager’s near-neutral stance (52) indicates a lack of decisive technical edge. On the other end, the majority of value-oriented and fundamental investors—from Graham to Lynch—return neutral scores (50) due to insufficient data, signaling they’d need more concrete financials to form a view. The most cautious methodologies, like Nelson (24) and Marks’ late-cycle assessment (31), warn of overvaluation or market exhaustion, contrasting sharply with Livermore’s bullish trend reading. The debate thus hinges on whether this stock’s price action justifies a speculative bet or if it’s already priced for growth, with no clear consensus among the frameworks.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 62
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 52
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 51
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
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)
🟡 51
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
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%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 42
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 41
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 40
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)
🔴 27
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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 an uptrend (8 bullish · 2 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 uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 13.7.2026 | $0.017 |
| 12.7.2026 | $0.017 |
| 13.4.2026 | $0.017 |
| 12.4.2026 | $0.017 |
| 14.7.2025 | $0.015 |
| 13.7.2025 | $0.015 |
| 14.4.2025 | $0.015 |
| 13.4.2025 | $0.015 |
| 13.1.2025 | $0.014 |
| 12.1.2025 | $0.014 |
| 16.10.2024 | $0.014 |
| 15.10.2024 | $0.014 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 10 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Investing.com · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
MT Newswires · 17.9.2026
Stocktwits · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Barchart · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
CNW Group · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for GFL Environmental Inc. Subordinate voting shares, no par value (GFL) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for GFL specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
GFL's technical score is 76/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; RSI 53.2 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.23 (3y annualized return 8.2% / max drawdown 35.0%); MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; CMF 20 days: -0.22.
Yes — GFL 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 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
21,995,759 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 20,267,346 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 68.8% 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