Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$87.75
▲ $1.33 (+1.5%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:38 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$2.10B
Day Range
$84.30 - $87.78
52-Week Range
$45.10 - $93.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$71.29
Resistance
$93.00
PRLB is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+72.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 15/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 33.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $39.26 vs. price $87.75 (-55.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (62/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — 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
62
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $87.75
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 56)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
2d ago · $86.42
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 9 to 38 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
62
Quality
42
Value
33
Momentum
88
Risk
56
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
50
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 of Proto Labs, Inc. has centered on its recognition as a leader in innovation, particularly after being named to *Business Insider’s* "America’s Most Innovative Businesses 2027" list for its patent portfolio and R&D investments. The company also announced the appointment of Sam Ramahi as Chief Operations Officer, reinforcing its operational and technological strengths amid mixed stock performance, with a notable year-to-date decline despite short-term gains. Analysts highlight its position in digital manufacturing and ongoing growth potential.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Proto Labs, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
57
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
63
Fundamentals
50
Technical
88
Valuation
33
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+8%
Market Narrative
85
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+49
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant overconfidence—backed by a 106% valuation premium over DCF and momentum outpacing fundamentals—suggests traders are overestimating upside potential. Herding and euphoria reinforce this, though the narrative gap (75 vs. 36) hints at a disconnect between optimism and fundamentals. The key question: *Will traders remain oblivious to valuation extremes, or will reality intrude?* Low panic selling and neutral RSI imply complacency, but the wide gap could trigger rebalancing if fundamentals fail to justify the premium.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:10 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"recognized as one of America’s Most Innovative Businesses by Business Insider"
"appointed Sam Ramahi as Chief Operations Officer to oversee global operations"
"extensive library of patents for manufacturing technology, ongoing investment in research and development"
"industrial products stocks lagging Proto Labs (PRLB) this year"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for PRLB reflects deep methodological contrasts between risk-focused and defensive investors versus those prioritizing liquidity or market timing. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights the stock’s resilience in a credit crunch, aligning with his emphasis on liquidity and systemic stability—something no other framework prioritizes. Meanwhile, the bulk of methodologies—from Graham’s defensive criteria to Fisher’s quality focus—score poorly, flagging concerns like valuation, volatility, or lack of growth, which would deter patient, long-term holders. The middle-ground approaches (Loeb, Nelson, Veblen) suggest moderate caution, torn between speculative excitement (Mackay) and weak trend signals (Livermore), while efficient-market skeptics (Malkiel/Bogle) and cycle-aware investors (Marks) see it as a late-stage or overvalued bet. The extremes—Bagehot’s near-universal approval versus Housel’s volatility warning—underscore whether the stock’s strength lies in its crisis utility or its speculative risk.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 64
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 57
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)
🟡 51
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 37
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 32
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 27
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 26
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 25
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 18
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 15
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 14
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 12
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 7
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 (10 bullish · 1 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.
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
44.5%
Operating Margin
4.7%
Net Margin
4.0%
EBITDA Margin
11.1%
ROE
3.2%
ROA
2.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.89
Cash
$110.83M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.49
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$87.75
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$39.26
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-55.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
3.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.0% | $61.45M | $56.38M |
| 2 | 2.9% | $63.22M | $53.21M |
| 3 | 2.8% | $64.96M | $50.16M |
| 4 | 2.6% | $66.67M | $47.23M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $68.34M | $44.41M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$59.66M
Terminal Value
$1.08B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$700.37M
Enterprise Value
$951.77M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$951.77M
*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
$27.80
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$15.73
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Business Wire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Zacks · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
StockStory · 31.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Business Wire · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Zacks · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Proto Labs, Inc. (PRLB) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 62/100, 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.
PRLB currently scores 62/100 (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, PRLB's estimated fair value is $39.26, which is 55.3% below the current price of $87.75. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PRLB's technical score is 88/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 33.3%; Net income growth: 28.0%; Current ratio: 3.49.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $39.26 vs. price $87.75 (-55.3%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Free cash flow growth: -13.1%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PRLB.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 500 | -500 | $78.38 |
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 1,500 | -1,500 | $76.91 |
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 33,005 | -1,500 | $76.91 |
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 32,505 | -500 | $78.38 |
| Krishna Suresh | Tax Withholding in Shares | 23.5.2026 | 1,247 | -1,247 | $71.36 |
| Krishna Suresh | Tax Withholding in Shares | 23.5.2026 | 30,147 | -1,247 | $71.36 |
| Parlange Bernardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.5.2026 | 2,109 | +2,109 | — |
| Schumacher Daniel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 255 | -255 | $71.13 |
| Parlange Bernardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.5.2026 | 3,789 | +3,789 | — |
| Parlange Bernardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.5.2026 | 2,109 | +2,109 | — |
| Parlange Bernardo | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.5.2026 | 3,789 | +3,789 | — |
| Schumacher Daniel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 45,019 | -255 | $71.13 |
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| Gawlick Rainer | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| Black Archie C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| KRANTZ DONALD G | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| Chin Moonhie | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| Chand Sujeet | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 2,210 | +2,210 | — |
| KRANTZ DONALD G | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 26,863 | +2,210 | — |
| WEHRWEIN SVEN | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 34,505 | +2,210 | — |
| Chand Sujeet | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 26,863 | +2,210 | — |
| Chin Moonhie | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 22,306 | +2,210 | — |
| Gawlick Rainer | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 46,093 | +2,210 | — |
| Black Archie C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 28,428 | +2,210 | — |
| Kenison Michael R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.5.2026 | 1,557 | -1,557 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
615,345 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 675,490 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
64.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.7% 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