Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$28.16
▲ $0.78 (+2.8%)
Market data updated: 09/17 05:53 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$2.60B
Day Range
$27.08 - $28.38
52-Week Range
$11.43 - $35.83
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
ACHC 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.
+29.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/27 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 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: 21.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$113.26 vs. price $28.16 (-502.2%)
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
48
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
50
Value
38
Momentum
48
Risk
40
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
38
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Acadia Healthcare (ACHC) has primarily focused on its stock performance and financial challenges. Despite an 11.8% rise since its last earnings report, analysts remain skeptical due to its unprofitability and struggles with controlling operating expenses. Revenue growth is noted, but profitability is under pressure from rising labor costs and a tight labor market. The broader mental health treatment market—valued at over $159 billion—is also highlighted, with ACHC positioned among key players amid digital adoption trends. Overall, the narrative leans toward cautious optimism.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
33
Fundamentals
38
Technical
48
Valuation
38
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+13%
Market Narrative
57
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+19
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior reflects a market where participants are adjusting positions in lockstep with peers, likely due to relative underperformance. Euphoria persists despite neutral RSI, suggesting investors remain optimistic about long-term fundamentals despite recent underperformance. Overconfidence may stem from disconnect between price momentum and earnings growth, raising questions about sustainability. The narrative-reality gap (24) hints at potential misalignment between investor expectations and fundamentals. Key uncertainty lies in whether herding will persist or shift as sentiment or fundamentals diverge.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 05:14 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Acadia Healthcare's revenue continues to climb, but profitability is pressured by rising labor costs and a tight labor market."
"Unprofitable companies face headwinds as they struggle to keep operating expenses under control."
"Should You Continue to Hold ACHC Stock at an 18.17X P/E Valuation?"
"Evaluating $159 Billion Forecast, Digital App Adoption, and Strategies of Acadia Healthcare"
📈 4D 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 — 71/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here reveal a stark divide between technical/cyclical and fundamental/value approaches to ACHC. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests the stock’s cycle position is near oversold, aligning with his momentum-driven principles, while Benjamin Graham’s enterprising investor framework acknowledges some discount but falls short of his 'net-net' threshold. In contrast, value-focused investors like Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, and Edgar Lawrence Smith dismiss the stock outright, citing a lack of quality, growth, or stability—reflecting their strict criteria for long-term holds. Meanwhile, behavioral and risk-averse models like Gerald M. Loeb and Thorstein Veblen flag excessive volatility or speculative tendencies, while Howard Marks’ cycle and valuation warnings underscore concerns about late-stage risks. The middle-ground approaches—from Burton Malkiel’s efficient-market skepticism to Jack Schwager’s indecision—highlight the stock’s lack of clear alpha potential, leaving it in a gray zone between speculative opportunity and red flag.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 71
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 59
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 57
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 53
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)
🟡 49
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 45
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 37
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 23
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 19
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 13
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 10
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 278 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 5 bearish · 2 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.
Low 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
—
Net Margin
-33.3%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-56.6%
ROA
-20.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$12.16
Cash
$133.24M
Total Debt
$2.50B
Current Ratio
1.55
Debt/Equity
1.28
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$28.16
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$113.26
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-502.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
8.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.3% | $-476.45M | $-437.11M |
| 2 | 6.9% | $-509.11M | $-428.51M |
| 3 | 5.4% | $-536.62M | $-414.37M |
| 4 | 4.0% | $-557.83M | $-395.18M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-571.77M | $-371.61M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-439.91M
Terminal Value
$-9.02B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-5.86B
Enterprise Value
$-7.91B
Net Debt
$2.37B
Equity Value
$-10.27B
*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
$21.49
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$6.13
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 12 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
StockStory · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
StockStory · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 26.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 24.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 23.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 17.8.2026
StockStory · 14.8.2026
Zacks · 14.8.2026
MT Newswires · 14.8.2026
StockStory · 10.8.2026
StockStory · 31.7.2026
MT Newswires · 30.7.2026
Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. (ACHC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
ACHC currently scores 48/100 (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, ACHC's estimated fair value is -$113.26, which is 502.2% below the current price of $28.16. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ACHC's technical score is 48/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: 21.5%; Current ratio: 1.55; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$113.26 vs. price $28.16 (-502.2%); Net margin: -33.3% (negative); ATR: 5.1% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ACHC.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Farley Brian | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.7.2026 | 135,982 | -1,770 | $34.51 |
| Farley Brian | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.7.2026 | 1,770 | -1,770 | $34.51 |
| Farley Brian | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 1,370 | -1,370 | $26.24 |
| Farley Brian | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 137,752 | -1,370 | $26.24 |
| WAUD REEVE B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Gregg Vicky B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Bernhard Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Bissell E. Perot | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 5,500 | +5,500 | — |
| KELLY RALPH DAVID | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| WAUD REEVE B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 9,576 | +9,576 | — |
| Bissell E. Perot | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Harris Patrice A | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| GRIECO WILLIAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Fucci Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Cancelmi Daniel J | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 6,331 | +6,331 | — |
| Bernhard Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 5,124 | +5,124 | — |
| GRIECO WILLIAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 96,212 | +6,331 | — |
| Cancelmi Daniel J | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 12,956 | +6,331 | — |
| Bissell E. Perot | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 51,986 | +6,331 | — |
| Bissell E. Perot | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 57,486 | +5,500 | — |
| WAUD REEVE B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 66,283 | +6,331 | — |
| WAUD REEVE B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 75,859 | +9,576 | — |
| Gregg Vicky B | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 42,628 | +6,331 | — |
| Harris Patrice A | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 17,914 | +6,331 | — |
| Bernhard Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 40,235 | +6,331 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
22,583,163 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 21,801,530 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
74.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 72.4% 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