Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$224.20
▲ $5.28 (+2.4%)
Market data updated: 09/19 08:45 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$26.41B
Day Range
$218.24 - $224.43
52-Week Range
$165.51 - $254.89
Beta
—
Next Earnings
17.11.2026
Support
$214.19
Resistance
$254.89
WSM is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+12.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/27 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
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $117.94 vs. price $224.20 (-47.4%)
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
51
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
42
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
37
Risk
50
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
69
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING WSM...
Recent media coverage of **Williams-Sonoma, Inc.** highlights its strong financial performance amid broader retail challenges, with a focus on **market share gains** and **revenue growth** in a stagnant home furnishings sector. The company reported **6.2% comparable sales growth** and a **17.3% margin** in Q2 2026, alongside AI-driven shopping innovations. Analysts, including Argus, maintained a **buy rating** with an adjusted price target of **$250**, reflecting optimism despite macroeconomic headwinds affecting hardline retailers.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Williams-Sonoma, Inc.. News trend score: 80. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
69
Technical
37
Valuation
38
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price (3M)
-1%
Market Narrative
70
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+30
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a dominant **overconfidence** bias, where traders appear detached from fundamental growth despite valuation extremes (+93% above DCF). The extreme narrative gap (33 points) and euphoric sentiment (100/100) further imply a disconnect between price action and underlying fundamentals. While FOMO and panic signals are muted, the lack of anchoring or loss aversion signals may reflect complacency. The key question: *Will traders reassess valuation when momentum weakens further?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:38 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Williams-Sonoma delivered 6.7% revenue growth, primarily by gaining market share in a flat home furnishings industry."
"Argus Research analyst Christopher Graja maintains Williams-Sonoma with a Buy and raises the price target from $230 to $250."
"A number of stocks fell... after surging crude oil prices and a sharp jump in Treasury yields stoked renewed concerns over inflation and demand destruction."
"Williams-Sonoma Q2 FY2026 earnings: 6.2% comp growth, 17.3% margin, AI shopping"
📈 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 — 68/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 5/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two stark camps: those who see tactical or cyclical opportunities and those who flag fundamental or structural red flags. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests a favorable cycle position, while Jack Schwager and Edgar Lawrence Smith also find disciplined setups or reasonable conditions, though less aggressively. In contrast, the majority—including Fisher, Marks, Graham, and Lynch—reject the stock outright, citing weak growth, valuation risks, or lack of defensive qualities. Even the market efficiency camp dismisses it as unworthy of active picking, while volatility-sensitive thinkers like Morgan Housel and Walter Bagehot warn of liquidity or psychological pitfalls. The divide reflects a tension between short-term technical or cyclical signals and long-term fundamental skepticism.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 68
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)
🟡 63
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 60
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 60
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)
🟡 54
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)
🟡 51
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 47
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 44
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 42
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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)
🔴 32
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 18
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 15
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 14
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 13
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)
🔴 5
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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 · 5 bearish · 3 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
$214.19
Range Bottom
$254.89
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
46.2%
Operating Margin
18.1%
Net Margin
13.9%
EBITDA Margin
21.1%
ROE
52.3%
ROA
20.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$8.96
Cash
$1.02B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.39
Debt/Equity
—
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 17.7.2026 | $0.760 |
| 16.7.2026 | $0.760 |
| 17.4.2026 | $0.760 |
| 16.4.2026 | $0.760 |
| 16.1.2026 | $0.660 |
| 15.1.2026 | $0.660 |
| 17.10.2025 | $0.660 |
| 16.10.2025 | $0.660 |
| 18.7.2025 | $0.660 |
| 17.7.2025 | $0.660 |
| 17.4.2025 | $0.660 |
| 16.4.2025 | $0.660 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$224.20
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$117.94
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-47.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-3.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -3.3% | $1.02B | $936.29M |
| 2 | -1.9% | $1.00B | $843.05M |
| 3 | -0.4% | $997.59M | $770.32M |
| 4 | 1.0% | $1.01B | $714.13M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.03B | $671.54M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.06B
Terminal Value
$16.29B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$10.59B
Enterprise Value
$14.53B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$14.53B
*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
$16.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$16.28
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 11 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
StockStory · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
CNBC · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Williams-Sonoma, Inc. (WSM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
WSM currently scores 51/100 (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, WSM's estimated fair value is $117.94, which is 47.4% below the current price of $224.20. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
WSM's technical score is 37/100, 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): 52.3% — strong; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $117.94 vs. price $224.20 (-47.4%); Free cash flow growth: -7.3%; Net income growth: -3.3%.
Yes — WSM 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 14 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yearout Karalyn | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 522 | -522 | $246.39 |
| Yearout Karalyn | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 20,195 | -522 | $246.39 |
| Yearout Karalyn | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $250.00 |
| Yearout Karalyn | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 20,717 | -1,000 | $250.00 |
| Ready William J | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 127 | +127 | — |
| Huffington Arianna | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 114 | +114 | — |
| Bracey Esi Eggleston | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 118 | +118 | — |
| Campion Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 118 | +118 | — |
| Ready William J | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 127 | +127 | — |
| Campion Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 118 | +118 | — |
| Huffington Arianna | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 3,254 | +114 | — |
| Bracey Esi Eggleston | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 118 | +118 | — |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 3,363 | -3,363 | $222.74 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 16,894 | -16,894 | $222.05 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 5,190 | -5,190 | $220.92 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 8,553 | -8,553 | $220.02 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $219.10 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 922,524 | -1,000 | $219.10 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 913,971 | -8,553 | $220.02 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 908,781 | -5,190 | $220.92 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 891,887 | -16,894 | $222.05 |
| ALBER LAURA | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 888,524 | -3,363 | $222.74 |
| Dahnke Scott Arnold | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 1,616 | +1,616 | — |
| Finucane Anne A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 1,028 | +1,028 | — |
| Bracey Esi Eggleston | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 1,011 | +1,011 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,452,754 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 5,613,323 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
76.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 74.9% 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