Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$115.00
▼ $1.04 (-0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:28 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$22.93B
Day Range
$114.24 - $115.98
52-Week Range
$93.00 - $164.80
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$112.11
Resistance
$164.80
TPR is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+1.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 16/32 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $142.02 vs. price $115.00 (+23.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 3.46
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.
🗓️ 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
63
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
79
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
30
Risk
50
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
78
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING TPR...
Recent media coverage of Tapestry, Inc. has centered on its mixed investor reception following steady Q2 growth, with analysts noting strong revenue gains—particularly in international markets like China and Europe—and among Gen Z consumers. The company’s core leather goods segment and disciplined execution were highlighted, though concerns about moderating growth expectations weighed on stock performance. Additionally, insider transactions, including stock option exercises by CEO Joanne Crevoiserat and CFO Scott Roe, drew attention. Analysts also debated Tapestry’s valuation relative to peers.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Tapestry, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
78
Technical
30
Valuation
62
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.
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-20%
Market Narrative
45
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior at 0.7% above support suggests traders are fixated on this near-term reference point, despite muted volume and negative momentum. Loss aversion (65) and herding (79) indicate cautious, risk-averse positioning, with participants aligning with peers rather than initiating aggressive moves. The narrative gap (-8) hints at a disconnect between perceived fundamentals (34) and observable price action (42), but anchoring remains the most visible psychological force. The key question is whether traders will break free from the 0.7% support anchor or double down as a test of resilience.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:26 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Scott Roe, CFO and COO at Tapestry, disclosed a large exercise of company stock options worth $0 in an SEC filing."
"Tapestry's International Growth Accelerates on China & Europe Gains"
"revenue gains to strong customer acquisition, particularly among Gen Z consumers"
"investors weighed future risks and moderating growth expectations"
📈 14D 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 — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Gerald M. Loeb — 37/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: the bullish growth-oriented investors and the cautious, risk-averse traditionalists. The highest-scoring models—Charles Mackay, Samuel Armstrong Nelson, and Howard Marks (Market Cycle)—all see it as a low-risk, cyclically favorable opportunity, with Mackay and Nelson even dismissing crowd-driven mania or overbought conditions. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch, Thorstein Veblen, and Philip Fisher lean bullish on its growth potential, though with slightly lower scores, suggesting they’re more focused on qualitative value creation than pure timing. In contrast, the defensive and risk-conscious frameworks—Benjamin Graham, Gerald M. Loeb, and Jesse Livermore—pile on red flags, with Livermore’s near-bottom score reflecting a clear trend-based rejection, while Graham and Loeb flag structural risks like volatility and capital preservation threats. The divide underscores whether the stock’s growth justifies its risk or if its volatility and lack of defensive attributes make it a speculative gamble rather than a core holding.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 96
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 80
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 80
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 80
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 77
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 77
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 61
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
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)
🟡 44
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
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)
🟡 42
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 40
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
🟡 40
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 38
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 37
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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 a downtrend (2 bullish · 8 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 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
77.8%
Operating Margin
23.9%
Net Margin
19.1%
EBITDA Margin
25.9%
ROE
220.7%
ROA
22.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.49
Cash
$974.70M
Total Debt
$2.40B
Current Ratio
1.75
Debt/Equity
3.46
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 4.9.2026 | $0.463 |
| 5.6.2026 | $0.400 |
| 4.6.2026 | $0.400 |
| 6.3.2026 | $0.400 |
| 5.3.2026 | $0.400 |
| 5.12.2025 | $0.400 |
| 4.12.2025 | $0.400 |
| 5.9.2025 | $0.400 |
| 4.9.2025 | $0.400 |
| 6.6.2025 | $0.350 |
| 5.6.2025 | $0.350 |
| 6.3.2025 | $0.350 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$115.00
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$142.02
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+23.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
6.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.5% | $1.93B | $1.77B |
| 2 | 5.5% | $2.04B | $1.71B |
| 3 | 4.5% | $2.13B | $1.64B |
| 4 | 3.5% | $2.20B | $1.56B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $2.26B | $1.47B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.81B
Terminal Value
$35.58B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$23.12B
Enterprise Value
$31.27B
Net Debt
$1.42B
Equity Value
$29.85B
*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
$3.29
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$4.67
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 4 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
StockStory · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
StockStory · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.9.2026
StockStory · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Tapestry, Inc. (TPR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 63/100, 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.
TPR currently scores 63/100 (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, TPR's estimated fair value is $142.02, which is 23.5% above the current price of $115.00. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TPR's technical score is 30/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $142.02 vs. price $115.00 (+23.5%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 786.6%; Free cash flow growth: 65.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Debt/equity: 3.46; Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — TPR 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kulikowsky Denise | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 3,619 | -3,619 | $115.36 |
| Kulikowsky Denise | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.9.2026 | 4,719 | -4,719 | $115.40 |
| Kulikowsky Denise | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 6,910 | +6,910 | $40.58 |
| Kulikowsky Denise | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 6,910 | -6,910 | — |
| Kulikowsky Denise | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 2,191 | -2,191 | $115.40 |
| Kahn Todd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 33,837 | -33,837 | $130.17 |
| Roe Scott A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 45,819 | -45,819 | $130.17 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 8,001 | -8,001 | $130.17 |
| Howard David E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 2,029 | -2,029 | $130.17 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 8,112 | -8,112 | $130.17 |
| Dadlani Manesh | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 1,099 | -1,099 | $130.17 |
| Roe Scott A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 82,854 | +82,854 | $33.81 |
| Roe Scott A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 2,817 | -2,817 | $130.17 |
| Kahn Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 66,282 | +66,282 | $33.81 |
| Howard David E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 14,100 | -14,100 | $130.17 |
| Dadlani Manesh | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 976 | -976 | $130.17 |
| Kahn Todd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 2,434 | -2,434 | $130.17 |
| Kahn Todd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 2,001 | -2,001 | $130.17 |
| Howard David E | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 27,619 | +27,619 | $33.81 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 112,790 | -112,790 | $130.17 |
| Roe Scott A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 3,296 | -3,296 | $130.17 |
| Howard David E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 1,601 | -1,601 | $130.17 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 220,940 | +220,940 | $33.81 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 719,886 | -112,790 | $130.17 |
| Crevoiserat Joanne C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 21.8.2026 | 840,788 | -8,001 | $130.17 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
15,002,149 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 16,530,504 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
20.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 31.3% 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