Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$167.56
▲ $0.77 (+0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/19 05:38 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$11.00B
Day Range
$165.51 - $168.08
52-Week Range
$153.83 - $216.30
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$166.64
Resistance
$216.30
TXRH 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: 3/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $103.69 vs. price $167.56 (-38.1%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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
41
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
34
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
6
Risk
42
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
54
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 Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (TXRH) has primarily focused on its strong five-year stock performance, with shares rising approximately 129%, though current valuations are being scrutinized as potentially overpriced relative to intrinsic value and market multiples. Analysts have debated whether the stock remains undervalued based on its growth narrative or if it is now trading above fair value, with comparisons drawn to competitors like BJ’s Restaurants. The broader restaurant industry’s challenges, including labor shortages and volatile consumer spending, have also been noted as potential headwinds.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Texas Roadhouse, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 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
44
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
98
Fundamentals
54
Technical
6
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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)
-6%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+25
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s extreme anchoring (96) suggests traders are fixated on the 0.2% support level, ignoring broader valuation disconnects like the 76% DCF premium. Herding (59) and euphoria (35) imply lingering optimism, despite negative momentum and weak technicals. The narrative gap (28) hints at a disconnect between rosy sentiment and reality. The key question: will traders break free from the support anchor, or will overconfidence in fundamentals sustain the disconnect?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:29 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"stock looks more expensive than cheap, with the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) estimate suggesting the current price is close to intrinsic value while market multiples screen it as overvalued"
"BJ's Restaurants and Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) has put Texas Roadhouse stock back on investor watchlists"
"Texas Roadhouse shares are up about 129.5% over the past 5 years"
📈 12D 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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for TXRH reflects deep methodological disagreements about risk, valuation, and market psychology. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score suggests he sees a cyclical oversold opportunity, while Jack Schwager and Edgar Lawrence Smith also spot disciplined, long-term potential—though with varying degrees of conviction. Meanwhile, Fisher, Lynch, and Graham’s near-unanimous rejection highlights their strict criteria for growth, quality, and defensive metrics, dismissing the stock as either overpriced or structurally risky. The contrast between Marks’ cautious stance (flagging risk/valuation) and Veblen’s growth-focused skepticism further underscores whether the stock’s volatility is a speculative bubble or a fleeting trend. Even the efficient-market camp sees little edge, reinforcing that this stock’s appeal hinges entirely on subjective, non-evidence-based signals rather than broad market logic.
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 89
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 74
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
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)
🟢 65
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟡 55
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 36
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)
🟡 36
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 35
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 31
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 15
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 279 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
—
Operating Margin
8.1%
Net Margin
7.0%
EBITDA Margin
11.6%
ROE
28.4%
ROA
11.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.11
Cash
$134.71M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.50
Debt/Equity
—
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 1.9.2026 | $0.750 |
| 2.6.2026 | $0.750 |
| 1.6.2026 | $0.750 |
| 17.3.2026 | $0.750 |
| 16.3.2026 | $0.750 |
| 2.12.2025 | $0.680 |
| 1.12.2025 | $0.680 |
| 2.9.2025 | $0.680 |
| 1.9.2025 | $0.680 |
| 3.6.2025 | $0.680 |
| 2.6.2025 | $0.680 |
| 18.3.2025 | $0.680 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$167.56
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$103.69
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-38.1%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
13.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.6% | $388.56M | $356.47M |
| 2 | 10.8% | $430.59M | $362.42M |
| 3 | 8.0% | $465.22M | $359.24M |
| 4 | 5.3% | $489.75M | $346.95M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $502.00M | $326.26M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$342.07M
Terminal Value
$7.92B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.14B
Enterprise Value
$6.90B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$6.90B
*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
$21.96
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$18.06
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 3 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
StockStory · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
StockStory · 3.9.2026
Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (TXRH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, 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.
TXRH currently scores 41/100 (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, TXRH's estimated fair value is $103.69, which is 38.1% below the current price of $167.56. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TXRH'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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 28.4% — strong; Return on assets (ROA): 11.7% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $103.69 vs. price $167.56 (-38.1%); Current ratio: 0.50; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -5.7%.
Yes — TXRH 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 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marshall Lloyd Paul | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 9,826 | -500 | $204.65 |
| Marshall Lloyd Paul | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 500 | -500 | $204.65 |
| Carroll Hugh J | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 2,883 | -650 | $203.99 |
| Carroll Hugh J | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 650 | -650 | $203.99 |
| Morgan Gerald L. | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | $202.17 |
| EPPS DONNA E | Gift | 20.8.2026 | 49 | -49 | — |
| Humpich Keith | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 819 | -819 | $204.11 |
| EPPS DONNA E | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 820 | -820 | $206.56 |
| EPPS DONNA E | Gift | 17.8.2026 | 49 | -49 | — |
| MOORE GREGORY N | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | $208.32 |
| MOORE GREGORY N | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 26,900 | -3,000 | $208.32 |
| Carroll Hugh J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 2,667 | +2,667 | — |
| Carroll Hugh J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 2,667 | -2,667 | — |
| Renfroe Sean G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 1,218 | -1,218 | — |
| Renfroe Sean G | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 426 | -426 | $192.53 |
| Renfroe Sean G | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.7.2026 | 367 | -367 | $191.48 |
| Renfroe Sean G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 1,218 | +1,218 | — |
| Humpich Keith | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 2,114 | -2,114 | — |
| Humpich Keith | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.7.2026 | 636 | -636 | $191.48 |
| Humpich Keith | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 2,114 | +2,114 | — |
| Humpich Keith | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 21,773 | +2,114 | — |
| Humpich Keith | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.7.2026 | 21,137 | -636 | $191.48 |
| Humpich Keith | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 0 | -2,114 | — |
| Carroll Hugh J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 3,533 | +2,667 | — |
| Carroll Hugh J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 0 | -2,667 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,979,269 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,082,848 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.4% 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