Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$167.96
▲ $0.31 (+0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/19 10:34 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$6.12B
Day Range
$165.63 - $168.66
52-Week Range
$165.37 - $316.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
15.10.2026
Support
$165.37
Resistance
$214.70
POOL is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-48.3% (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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): 34.3% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $80.41 vs. price $167.96 (-52.1%)
Fair Value
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
39
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
26
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
6
Risk
48
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
70
Institutional
100
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 of Pool Corporation has focused on its valuation and market positioning within the consumer discretionary sector. Analysts like DA Davidson and Stephens & Co. have provided mixed but generally positive assessments, with Stephens maintaining an **Overweight** rating and a $225 price target, while DA Davidson initiated coverage with a **Neutral** rating and a $210 target. The company has also been noted for insider buying activity, signaling confidence, though broader economic uncertainty and weak industry performance relative to the S&P 500 have raised concerns about its stability. Comparisons to competitors like YETI have also appeared in financial discussions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Pool Corporation. 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
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
69
Fundamentals
70
Technical
6
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 sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price (3M)
-16%
Market Narrative
57
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+21
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **herding** behavior suggests investors are aligning with peers’ underperformance (-4.3% vs. -2.3%) rather than fundamentals or momentum. Overconfidence (45) and anchoring (43) imply traders may cling to narratives despite valuation gaps (+121% vs. DCF) and weak relative momentum. Confirmation bias (27) further reinforces selective attention to narrative over reality. The key question: *Will traders exit en masse or double down on perceived peer-driven weakness?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:10 AM
What could change this?
📈 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a clash between cyclical optimism and deep structural concerns. At the top of the spectrum, **Samuel Armstrong Nelson** and **Charles Mackay** see it as a cyclical opportunity—either near an oversold trough or free from crowd-driven mania—while **Howard Marks (Market Cycle)** also leans bullish, viewing it as early-to-mid cycle. Meanwhile, **Jack Schwager** and **Thorstein Veblen** hover in neutral territory, torn between potential upside and unproven profitability. The middle tier—**Gerald Loeb**, **Howard Marks (general)**, and **Efficient Market**—cautions that while the business may have merit, expectations could be overpriced or the stock’s case for outperformance is weak. The bottom half, dominated by **Grahamite** (defensive and enterprising), **Bagehot**, **Livermore**, and **Lynch**, slams it as risky, volatile, or statistically unattractive, with **Livermore** and **Housel** warning against its trend or emotional toll. The contrast underscores whether this stock is a **momentum play** (for cyclical investors) or a **value/quality trap** (for those prioritizing stability, trends, or long-term fundamentals).
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 84
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 61
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 44
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 41
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 39
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 37
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 27
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 14
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 13
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 9
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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 (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
29.7%
Operating Margin
11.0%
Net Margin
7.7%
EBITDA Margin
11.0%
ROE
34.3%
ROA
11.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$10.89
Cash
$104.96M
Total Debt
$1.20B
Current Ratio
2.24
Debt/Equity
1.01
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 13.8.2026 | $1.300 |
| 14.5.2026 | $1.300 |
| 13.5.2026 | $1.300 |
| 12.3.2026 | $1.250 |
| 11.3.2026 | $1.250 |
| 12.11.2025 | $1.250 |
| 11.11.2025 | $1.250 |
| 14.8.2025 | $1.250 |
| 13.8.2025 | $1.250 |
| 15.5.2025 | $1.250 |
| 14.5.2025 | $1.250 |
| 12.3.2025 | $1.200 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$167.96
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$80.41
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-52.1%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $294.15M | $269.86M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $285.04M | $239.91M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $281.52M | $217.39M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $283.31M | $200.70M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $290.39M | $188.73M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$309.52M
Terminal Value
$4.58B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.98B
Enterprise Value
$4.09B
Net Debt
$1.09B
Equity Value
$3.00B
*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
$31.79
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.20
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
StockStory · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
StockStory · 25.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 21.8.2026
Benzinga · 20.8.2026
Zacks · 14.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 14.8.2026
Bloomberg · 13.8.2026
StockStory · 12.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Argus Research · 4.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 4.8.2026
Pool Corporation (POOL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
POOL currently scores 39/100 (Weak) 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, POOL's estimated fair value is $80.41, which is 52.1% below the current price of $167.96. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
POOL's technical score is 6/100, 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: Return on equity (ROE): 34.3% — strong; Current ratio: 2.24; Return on assets (ROA): 11.2% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $80.41 vs. price $167.96 (-52.1%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.36 (3y annualized return -21.5% / max drawdown 60.2%).
Yes — POOL 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 — 10 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 44,071 | +3,963 | — |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 896,009 | -3,963 | — |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 3,963 | +3,963 | — |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 3,963 | -3,963 | — |
| Saik Walker | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.7.2026 | 1,959 | -22 | $184.61 |
| Saik Walker | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.7.2026 | 22 | -22 | $184.61 |
| WHALEN DAVID G | L | 28.5.2026 | 3 | +3 | $185.60 |
| WHALEN DAVID G | L | 28.5.2026 | 8,939 | +3 | $185.60 |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Open Market Purchase | 13.5.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $175.95 |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Open Market Purchase | 13.5.2026 | 40,108 | +10,000 | $175.95 |
| WHALEN DAVID G | Open Market Purchase | 8.5.2026 | 525 | +525 | $190.44 |
| WHALEN DAVID G | Open Market Purchase | 8.5.2026 | 8,936 | +525 | $190.44 |
| Hope James D | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 464 | +464 | $194.42 |
| STOKELY JOHN E | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 1,000 | +1,000 | $193.07 |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $190.00 |
| STOKELY JOHN E | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 16,230 | +1,000 | $193.07 |
| PEREZ DE LA MESA MANUEL J | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 30,108 | +10,000 | $190.00 |
| Hope James D | Open Market Purchase | 7.5.2026 | 3,678 | +464 | $194.42 |
| Watwood John Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 8,610 | +8,610 | — |
| Watwood John Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 4,305 | +4,305 | — |
| Watwood John Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 12,803 | +4,305 | — |
| Watwood John Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 21,413 | +8,610 | — |
| Murphy Kevin Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.4.2026 | 644 | +644 | — |
| OLER DEBRA SUE | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.4.2026 | 644 | +644 | — |
| Hope James D | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.4.2026 | 644 | +644 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,452,919 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,560,399 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.3% 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