Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$64.03
▼ $0.39 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:08 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$63.90 - $65.21
52-Week Range
$63.17 - $107.54
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$63.17
Resistance
$93.61
ULS is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
-5.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/31 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 40.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $33.39 vs. price $64.03 (-47.8%)
Fair Value
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
48
Quality
63
Value
33
Momentum
6
Risk
56
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
73
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 UL Solutions Inc. has primarily centered on its **second-quarter earnings report**, where net income surged 161.9% and earnings per share nearly tripled—though analysts noted the strong results included a one-time gain. Additionally, the company was indirectly referenced in broader market comparisons with other stocks, such as Bright Horizons Family Solutions, as investors assessed valuation and growth potential. No direct UL Solutions-specific developments beyond earnings were highlighted in the provided sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about UL Solutions Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
49
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
73
Fundamentals
73
Technical
6
Valuation
33
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-30%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+23
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior (88) reflects traders’ fixation on the 0.6% proximity to support, likely due to the stock’s recent pullback. Overconfidence (45) and euphoria (35) appear detached from technical reality, as valuation metrics (+119% DCF) contrast with oversold conditions. The narrative gap (31) suggests traders overestimate positive fundamentals relative to observable price action. The key question is whether traders will hold near support or pivot if the stock tests it. Loss aversion (68) may prevent aggressive selling, but anchoring could trigger defensive positioning if support is breached.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:30 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Net income more than doubled... But strip out the one-time item behind that surge"
"UL Solutions testing supports all-solid-state classification under GB/T 43568-2026"
📈 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 16/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for ULS reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score suggests he sees a cyclical opportunity nearing oversold conditions, while Jack Schwager and Edgar Lawrence Smith both highlight long-term potential—one emphasizing disciplined setups, the other a decade-long hold. In contrast, Benjamin Graham’s near-zero scores reject the stock outright, dismissing it as too risky even for his enterprising investor criteria, while Peter Lynch’s low score aligns with his preference for high-growth stocks at fair valuations. Meanwhile, market efficiency proponents like Malkiel and Bogle see little edge in picking this stock over an index, whereas cyclical analysts like Marks and Schwager spot early-stage upside. The tension between defensive investors (Graham) and growth/cycle traders (Nelson, Lynch) underscores whether ULS is a speculative bet or a fundamentally sound long-term play.
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)
🟢 96
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 65
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 60
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 51
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 42
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 37
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)
🔴 17
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
🔴 16
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 281 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
49.5%
Operating Margin
17.1%
Net Margin
10.6%
EBITDA Margin
23.3%
ROE
25.8%
ROA
11.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.62
Cash
$295.00M
Total Debt
$491.00M
Current Ratio
1.32
Debt/Equity
0.39
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 31.8.2026 | $0.145 |
| 29.5.2026 | $0.145 |
| 28.5.2026 | $0.145 |
| 2.3.2026 | $0.145 |
| 1.3.2026 | $0.145 |
| 28.11.2025 | $0.130 |
| 27.11.2025 | $0.130 |
| 29.8.2025 | $0.130 |
| 28.8.2025 | $0.130 |
| 30.5.2025 | $0.130 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.130 |
| 28.2.2025 | $0.130 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$64.03
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$33.39
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-47.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
6.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.6% | $429.62M | $394.15M |
| 2 | 5.6% | $453.59M | $381.78M |
| 3 | 4.6% | $474.24M | $366.20M |
| 4 | 3.5% | $490.96M | $347.81M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $503.23M | $327.07M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$403.00M
Terminal Value
$7.94B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.16B
Enterprise Value
$6.97B
Net Debt
$196.00M
Equity Value
$6.78B
*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
$6.22
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.75
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 11 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
StockStory · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 30.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 30.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Zacks · 28.8.2026
Fintel · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
StockStory · 28.8.2026
UL Solutions Inc. (ULS) 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.
ULS 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, ULS's estimated fair value is $33.39, which is 47.8% below the current price of $64.03. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ULS'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: Free cash flow growth: 40.4%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 25.8% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $33.39 vs. price $64.03 (-47.8%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -1.2%; Net income growth: -0.3%.
Yes — ULS 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 19 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 2,005 | -2,005 | $74.43 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 10,495 | -10,495 | $73.52 |
| Shannon James M | Gift | 6.8.2026 | 600 | -600 | — |
| Shannon James M | Gift | 6.8.2026 | 6,542 | -600 | — |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 5,590 | -5,590 | $92.89 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 3,629 | -3,629 | $91.02 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 3,281 | -3,281 | $91.89 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 160,595 | -3,629 | $91.02 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 157,314 | -3,281 | $91.89 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 151,724 | -5,590 | $92.89 |
| Kini Vikram | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.7.2026 | 213 | +213 | — |
| THAMAN MICHAEL H | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.7.2026 | 340 | +340 | — |
| THAMAN MICHAEL H | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.7.2026 | 698 | +340 | — |
| Kini Vikram | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.7.2026 | 437 | +213 | — |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 4,800 | -4,800 | $97.92 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 2,600 | -2,600 | $101.05 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 300 | -300 | $101.74 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 1,200 | -1,200 | $100.34 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 3,600 | -3,600 | $99.05 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 171,924 | -4,800 | $97.92 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 168,324 | -3,600 | $99.05 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 167,124 | -1,200 | $100.34 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 164,524 | -2,600 | $101.05 |
| Scanlon Jennifer F. | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 164,224 | -300 | $101.74 |
| PEPPING KAREN K | Open Market Sale | 9.6.2026 | 725 | -725 | $97.74 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,935,965 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,940,903 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
38.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.7% 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