Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$117.18
▼ $2.33 (-1.9%)
Market data updated: 09/20 10:13 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$10.31B
Day Range
$116.01 - $120.76
52-Week Range
$74.92 - $120.76
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$81.39
Resistance
$120.76
QRVO is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+30.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 21/33 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
🟢 Bullish
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: 524.1%
Growth
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
73
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
3d ago · $113.97
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 10 to 45 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
3d ago · $113.97
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
3d ago · $113.97
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 41 to 73 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
16d ago · $100.38
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 9 to 41 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
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 September 16, 2026
Then
71
$118.06
Now
73
$117.18
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
68
Quality
47
Value
50
Momentum
92
Risk
46
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
75
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.
Everyone's writing about Qorvo, Inc.. 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
64
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
70
Fundamentals
75
Technical
92
Valuation
50
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+19%
Market Narrative
86
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+48
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 7D 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 — 84/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Walter Bagehot’s documented principles, the model estimates the stock’s strong liquidity and ability to survive a credit squeeze, which aligns with Peter Lynch’s view of an under‑priced growth candidate and Howard Marks’s assessment of reasonably priced risk. In contrast, Morgan Housel, Gerald Loeb and Jesse Livermore, whose criteria emphasize steady compounding, moderate capital risk and clear market trends, give more modest scores, reflecting uncertainty about the company’s long‑term risk profile. Investors focused on valuation cycles and market efficiency—such as Howard Marks (Market Cycle), Burton Malkiel & John Bogle, and Benjamin Graham—rate the stock lower, citing mixed cycle positioning, weak evidence for out‑performing an index, and failure to meet defensive safety margins. The very low score from Samuel Armstrong Nelson underscores a concern that the current cycle may be stretched toward overbought, illustrating how differing methodological lenses produce a range of conclusions.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 84
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)
🟢 82
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 73
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 54
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 45
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 33
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 32
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 28
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 22
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
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 (11 bullish · 1 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 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
45.9%
Operating Margin
11.2%
Net Margin
9.2%
EBITDA Margin
11.2%
ROE
10.1%
ROA
5.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.66
Cash
$1.22B
Total Debt
$1.55B
Current Ratio
3.24
Debt/Equity
0.46
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$117.18
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$107.28
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-8.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
1.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.1% | $686.76M | $630.05M |
| 2 | 1.4% | $696.51M | $586.24M |
| 3 | 1.8% | $708.90M | $547.40M |
| 4 | 2.1% | $724.07M | $512.95M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $742.17M | $482.36M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$679.56M
Terminal Value
$11.70B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$7.61B
Enterprise Value
$10.37B
Net Debt
$330.14M
Equity Value
$10.04B
*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
$35.75
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.30
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 6 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 18.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
MT Newswires · 16.9.2026
Zacks · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Barrons.com · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Proactive · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
StockStory · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Qorvo, Inc. (QRVO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 73/100, rated "Strong". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
QRVO currently scores 73/100 (Strong) 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, QRVO's estimated fair value is $107.28, which is 8.5% below the current price of $117.18. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
QRVO's technical score is 92/100, 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: 524.1%; Free cash flow growth: 40.2%; Net income growth: 509.5%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.0% of price; Calmar: 0.12 (3y annualized return 7.0% / max drawdown 60.7%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for QRVO.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CREVISTON STEVEN E | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,852 | -1,852 | $101.36 |
| FEGO PAUL J | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 100 | -100 | $100.01 |
| BRUGGEWORTH ROBERT A | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 16,727 | -16,727 | $100.53 |
| CREVISTON STEVEN E | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,958 | -2,958 | $100.56 |
| FEGO PAUL J | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,400 | -2,400 | $100.00 |
| BRUGGEWORTH ROBERT A | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 12,017 | -12,017 | $101.35 |
| Stewart Frank P. | Gift | 31.8.2026 | 1,874 | -1,874 | — |
| Stewart Frank P. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 8,279 | -8,279 | $94.72 |
| Brown Grant | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 5,179 | -5,179 | $97.50 |
| Chesley Philip | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 5,487 | -5,487 | $97.50 |
| Feld Peter A | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| BRUNER JUDY | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| CLEMMER RICHARD L | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| HARDING JOHN R | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| Koopmans Chris | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| LOWE ALAN S | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| RHINES WALDEN C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| Nelson Roderick | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| SPRADLEY SUSAN LOUISE | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 2,327 | +2,327 | — |
| BRUNER JUDY | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 12,526 | +2,327 | — |
| RHINES WALDEN C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 74,065 | +2,327 | — |
| CLEMMER RICHARD L | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 6,410 | +2,327 | — |
| LOWE ALAN S | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 7,233 | +2,327 | — |
| SPRADLEY SUSAN LOUISE | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 14,351 | +2,327 | — |
| HARDING JOHN R | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2026 | 10,317 | +2,327 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,918,326 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,555,540 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
57.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.0% 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