Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Materials · ·
$286.12
▼ $4.44 (-1.5%)
Market data updated: 09/18 12:24 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$63.71B
Day Range
$283.55 - $288.01
52-Week Range
$229.11 - $314.87
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
APD is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
+0.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.00
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$233.29 vs. price $286.12 (-181.5%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
85/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+1.1%
Median 40D Outcome
69/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
60%
+4.3% … +8.1%
🟡 Base
13%
+0.3% … +0.5%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-10.2% … -1.9%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 20 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 60% (95% CI 36%–80%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +4.1%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
3 occurrence(s) · 67% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.8% | -0.5% … +1.9% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.8% | -0.4% … +3.1% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 60% (36%–80%) | +4.1% | -0.6% … +5.7% | +0.9% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.1% | -3.2% … +7.2% | +1.3% |
| 60D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.4% | -2.2% … +5.9% | +2.0% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-06-27 | 85/100 | Downtrend | +4.1% | +10.0% |
| 2026-05-28 | 84/100 | Consolidation | -2.1% | +8.0% |
| 2023-05-16 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +4.8% | +4.8% |
| 2026-03-06 | 82/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +8.1% | +2.6% |
| 2021-12-02 | 81/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +5.9% | -19.8% |
| 2022-01-18 | 81/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -13.5% | -12.8% |
| 2020-10-27 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.2% | -1.6% |
| 2018-02-07 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +5.6% | +2.9% |
| 2018-04-02 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.7% | -0.4% |
| 2018-10-17 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -1.4% | -2.8% |
| 2023-10-02 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +0.6% | -1.2% |
| 2023-08-10 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +4.3% | +2.4% |
| 2025-03-18 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -9.1% | -2.9% |
| 2026-06-11 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +8.6% | +7.0% |
| 2024-04-15 | 76/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +8.3% | +11.6% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLB (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
36
Today
57
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🔎 What Changed (vs. 30 days ago)
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
26d ago · $305.10
Evidence: תבנית שמתאימה לשלב חלוקה מוקדם/אמצעי — טווח מסחר אחרי עלייה עם מחזור מסחר יורד.
What happened after
26d ago · $305.10
Evidence: 8 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
29d ago · $302.85
Evidence: תבנית שמתאימה לשלב חלוקה מוקדם/אמצעי — טווח מסחר אחרי עלייה עם מחזור מסחר יורד.
What happened after
29d ago · $302.85
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
30d ago · $303.84
Evidence: 10 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 18, 2026
Then
57
$303.18
Now
36
$286.12
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
26
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
23
Risk
48
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
32
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING APD...
Recent coverage of Air Products centers on a bullish analyst outlook—Argus Research raised its price target to $329 and maintained a buy rating, while Seeking Alpha highlighted improving margins, lower CAPEX and a disciplined energy‑transition strategy. Analysts note the stock has lagged the S&P 500 but remain cautiously optimistic. The company also drew attention for joining three other U.S. firms in a $2 billion investment pledge to support South Korea’s semiconductor and clean‑energy projects.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Air Products. News trend score: 68. Reason: 7 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
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
81
Fundamentals
32
Technical
23
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.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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)
+2%
Market Narrative
43
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **herding** state (43) reflects APD’s relative underperformance today (-1.2% vs. peers), consistent with traders aligning with broader sector moves. **Confirmation bias** (17) and **anchoring** (35) further suggest traders may be reinforcing narratives despite weak fundamentals (flat revenue, shrinking margins). The **narrative gap** (+13) hints at a disconnect between optimistic expectations and stagnant reality. Key uncertainty remains: whether herding persists or shifts if APD’s underperformance widens or peers rally further.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:12 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"'APD's 25% rally is backed by... forecast-topping earnings and raised fiscal 2026 guidance'"
"'US firms pledge $2bn for South Korea’s chip, clean energy sectors'"
📈 16D 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 — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for APD reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay’s high scores (92 and 90) suggest they see favorable cycle positioning and no crowd-driven mania, aligning with their focus on technical or sentiment-based signals. In contrast, Benjamin Graham and Philip Fisher’s near-zero scores (26 and 7) stem from strict valuation and quality thresholds—Graham’s defensive criteria and Fisher’s growth-quality standards simply aren’t met here. Meanwhile, moderate scorers like Howard Marks (67) and Gerald Loeb (61) balance risk and opportunity, acknowledging reasonable pricing but not outright conviction, while Jack Schwager (41) and Jesse Livermore (35) see no clear edge or trend alignment. The spectrum from ‘favorable’ to ‘no edge’ highlights how subjective criteria—whether cycle timing, defensive metrics, or growth potential—can lead to wildly different conclusions on the same stock.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 97
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 64
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 61
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 59
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 59
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 55
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 53
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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)
🟡 38
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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)
🔴 27
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 26
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 22
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$284.34
Range Bottom
$313.93
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
31.4%
Operating Margin
-7.3%
Net Margin
-3.3%
EBITDA Margin
5.7%
ROE
-2.6%
ROA
-1.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.77
Cash
$1.86B
Total Debt
$34.70M
Current Ratio
1.38
Debt/Equity
0.00
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 1.7.2026 | $1.810 |
| 30.6.2026 | $1.810 |
| 1.4.2026 | $1.810 |
| 31.3.2026 | $1.810 |
| 2.1.2026 | $1.790 |
| 1.1.2026 | $1.790 |
| 1.10.2025 | $1.790 |
| 30.9.2025 | $1.790 |
| 1.7.2025 | $1.790 |
| 30.6.2025 | $1.790 |
| 1.4.2025 | $1.790 |
| 31.3.2025 | $1.790 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$286.12
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$233.29
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-181.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-1.8%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -1.8% | $-3.70B | $-3.39B |
| 2 | -0.7% | $-3.67B | $-3.09B |
| 3 | 0.4% | $-3.69B | $-2.85B |
| 4 | 1.4% | $-3.74B | $-2.65B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-3.83B | $-2.49B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-3.77B
Terminal Value
$-60.47B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-39.30B
Enterprise Value
$-53.77B
Net Debt
$-1.82B
Equity Value
$-51.95B
*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
$67.47
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$61.82
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 9 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Fintel · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
PR Newswire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Trefis · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Barchart · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Air Products (APD) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 36/100, 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.
APD currently scores 36/100 (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, APD's estimated fair value is -$233.29, which is 181.5% below the current price of $286.12. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
APD's technical score is 23/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.00; Price is above the 200-day average; Debt/equity: 0.00.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$233.29 vs. price $286.12 (-181.5%); Operating margin: -7.3% (negative); Net margin: -3.3% (negative).
Yes — APD 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LEPORE MATTHEW | Tax Withholding in Shares | 18.8.2026 | 418 | -418 | $303.62 |
| CALAWAY TONIT M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 20.622 | +20.622 | $271.35 |
| Evans Andrew W | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 8.269 | +8.269 | $271.35 |
| Graziano Jessica | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 173.757 | +173.757 | $271.35 |
| Ungerleider Howard I | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 6.463 | +6.463 | $271.35 |
| REILLEY DENNIS H | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 17.885 | +17.885 | $271.35 |
| Smith Wayne Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 34.573 | +34.573 | $271.35 |
| Stern Alfred | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 101.299 | +101.299 | $271.35 |
| Patel Bhavesh V. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 141.169 | +141.169 | $271.35 |
| REILLEY DENNIS H | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 2,699 | +18 | $271.35 |
| Evans Andrew W | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,248 | +8 | $271.35 |
| CALAWAY TONIT M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,112 | +21 | $271.35 |
| Patel Bhavesh V. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,968 | +141 | $271.35 |
| Ungerleider Howard I | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 975 | +6 | $271.35 |
| Graziano Jessica | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,433 | +174 | $271.35 |
| Smith Wayne Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 5,218 | +35 | $271.35 |
| Stern Alfred | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,752 | +101 | $271.35 |
| Schaeffer Melissa N. | Open Market Sale | 1.5.2026 | 2,714 | -2,714 | $303.76 |
| Schaeffer Melissa N. | Open Market Sale | 1.5.2026 | 14,212 | -2,714 | $303.76 |
| Stern Alfred | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 93.589 | +93.589 | $291.56 |
| Ungerleider Howard I | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 5.912 | +5.912 | $291.56 |
| Smith Wayne Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 31.627 | +31.627 | $291.56 |
| REILLEY DENNIS H | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 16.361 | +16.361 | $291.56 |
| Patel Bhavesh V. | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 130.457 | +130.457 | $291.56 |
| Graziano Jessica | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 160.504 | +160.504 | $291.56 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,049,459 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,922,295 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
48.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 51.6% 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