Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$148.05
▲ $0.11 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:50 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$9.86B
Day Range
$145.98 - $151.80
52-Week Range
$127.96 - $247.80
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$145.98
Resistance
$221.44
RRX is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+2.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
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: 42.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.6% of price
Risk
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (45/100) — 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
47
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
45
Momentum
19
Risk
40
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
52
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 Regal Rexnord Corporation (RRX) has been limited but highlights cautious investor sentiment. The company is occasionally mentioned alongside other mid-cap industrial stocks, particularly in relation to broader market trends like slower-than-expected industrial production growth and sector-wide declines. Analysts have noted its valuation as potentially attractive but flagged underlying risks, such as competition and cash allocation concerns, without specific details about Regal Rexnord’s performance or strategy.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Regal Rexnord Corporation. News trend score: 68. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 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)
40
Psychology
72
Fundamentals
52
Technical
19
Valuation
45
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-35%
Market Narrative
38
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
-2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
RRX’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, consistent with a 17.8% three-month drawdown and subdued trading activity. Herding behavior (score 49) suggests passive alignment with peers, but momentum and sentiment remain weak, limiting euphoria or overconfidence. The narrative gap (-4) hints at a slight disconnect between market perception and fundamentals, though no extreme bias is active. The key question: *Will traders exit to lock in gains or hold for recovery?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:22 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"slower-than-expected growth for July... manufacturing output saw a modest 0.2% increase"
"paths to becoming $100 billion corporations are ripe with competition... from giants with vast resources"
"producing plenty of cash but fail to allocate it effectively, leading to missed opportunities"
"Q2 earnings highlights: Regal Rexnord (RRX) Vs The Rest Of The Engineered Components and Systems Stocks"
📈 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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Gerald M. Loeb — 40/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some seeing it as a cautious buy and others dismissing it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology analysis and Howard Marks’ market cycle perspective—both suggest the stock isn’t in a bubble or late-cycle trap, framing it as a relatively safe or early-cycle opportunity. Meanwhile, disciplined traders like Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (in a separate framework) lean positive, emphasizing favorable risk/reward or reasonable risk pricing. However, the middle tier—including Peter Lynch, Nelson, and Fisher—cautions that while growth may exist, the stock’s valuation already reflects much of it, lacking the standout quality or undervaluation Fisher or Lynch would demand. At the lower end, Graham’s defensive framework and Livermore’s trend-following stance outright reject it, while efficient-market theorists and Housel see it as a mediocre hold at best, not worth the effort or conviction. The contrast highlights a tension between cyclical/psychological optimism and fundamental or trend-based skepticism.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 92
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 91
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
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 71
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 70
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 55
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)
🟡 53
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 47
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 47
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 45
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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)
🟡 41
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
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
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 (1 bullish · 10 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
37.4%
Operating Margin
11.5%
Net Margin
4.7%
EBITDA Margin
11.5%
ROE
4.1%
ROA
2.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.22
Cash
$521.70M
Total Debt
$4.79B
Current Ratio
2.15
Debt/Equity
0.70
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.350 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.350 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.350 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.350 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.350 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.350 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.350 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.350 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.350 |
| 29.6.2025 | $0.350 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.350 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.350 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$148.05
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$159.25
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+7.6%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.9% | $936.80M | $859.45M |
| 2 | 4.3% | $977.03M | $822.34M |
| 3 | 3.7% | $1.01B | $782.33M |
| 4 | 3.1% | $1.04B | $739.97M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.07B | $695.84M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$893.10M
Terminal Value
$16.88B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$10.97B
Enterprise Value
$14.87B
Net Debt
$4.27B
Equity Value
$10.61B
*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
$102.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$47.83
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 7 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
StockStory · 10.9.2026
ChartMill · 5.9.2026
StockStory · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 19.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 19.8.2026
Yahoo · 18.8.2026
StockStory · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 18.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
Regal Rexnord Corporation (RRX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
RRX currently scores 47/100 (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, RRX's estimated fair value is $159.25, which is 7.6% above the current price of $148.05. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
RRX's technical score is 19/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 42.9%; Free cash flow growth: 78.7%; Net income growth: 42.5%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.6% of price; Calmar: -0.03 (3y annualized return -1.6% / max drawdown 48.4%); Revenue growth (last year): -1.6%.
Yes — RRX 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long Kevin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 265 | -265 | $160.77 |
| Klossner Mark | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.8.2026 | 131 | -131 | $170.58 |
| Long Kevin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.8.2026 | 261 | -261 | $175.49 |
| Scarpelli Alexander P | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 170 | -170 | $176.24 |
| Scarpelli Alexander P | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 3,274 | -170 | $176.24 |
| Burt Stephen M | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1.53 | +1.53 | $211.20 |
| CRANDALL THEODORE D | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1.53 | +1.53 | $211.20 |
| Klossner Mark | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 8.663 | +8.663 | $211.20 |
| DOSS MICHAEL P | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 3.313 | +3.313 | $211.20 |
| Scarpelli Alexander P | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 2.348 | +2.348 | $211.20 |
| Rehard Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 16.879 | +16.879 | $211.20 |
| SACHDEV RAKESH | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1.53 | +1.53 | $211.20 |
| Paul Aamir | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 80.202 | +80.202 | $211.20 |
| Walker-Lee Robin A | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1.53 | +1.53 | $211.20 |
| Hilton Michael F | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 3.313 | +3.313 | $211.20 |
| Lewis Cheryl | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 8.619 | +8.619 | $211.20 |
| Bertsch Jan | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1.53 | +1.53 | $211.20 |
| STOELTING CURTIS W | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 1,222 | +2 | $211.20 |
| SACHDEV RAKESH | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 28,265 | +2 | $211.20 |
| CRANDALL THEODORE D | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 9,496 | +2 | $211.20 |
| DOSS MICHAEL P | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 4,831 | +3 | $211.20 |
| Hilton Michael F | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 9,163 | +3 | $211.20 |
| Bertsch Jan | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 9,701 | +2 | $211.20 |
| Walker-Lee Robin A | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 5,505 | +2 | $211.20 |
| Burt Stephen M | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.7.2026 | 26,265 | +2 | $211.20 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,209,677 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,843,385 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
50.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.6% 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