Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$56.48
▲ $0.03 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/22 01:43 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/22/2026
News analyzed: 09/22/2026
Market Cap
$14.89B
Day Range
$56.15 - $56.91
52-Week Range
$35.07 - $62.65
Beta
—
Next Earnings
16.11.2026
Support
$55.16
Resistance
$62.65
ARMK is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+50.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/25 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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 23.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 0.99
Risk
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (45/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
68
Quality
58
Value
45
Momentum
33
Risk
42
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
41
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 Aramark highlights its financial strength and strategic growth. The company has expanded its collegiate hospitality partnerships, drawing attention to its momentum in education services. Analysts have praised Aramark for its cash-generating capabilities and potential as a growth stock, while its participation in the Goldman Sachs Conference underscored its focus on investor engagement. Analyst price target increases and comparisons to peers further reflect positive market sentiment.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Aramark. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 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
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
41
Technical
33
Valuation
45
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+5%
Market Narrative
63
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+22
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ARMK suggests a detached euphoria, where traders appear to prioritize positive sentiment and valuation distance over negative momentum. The narrative gap (60 vs. 41) further implies optimism exceeds tangible fundamentals. Anchoring may subtly influence decisions near support, but no clear panic or herding is evident. The key question is whether traders will sustain this optimism despite weak momentum or if external catalysts will disrupt the current detached sentiment.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:19 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"3 Reasons Why Aramark (ARMK) is a Solid Choice"
"strong cash flow is a key indicator of stability"
"Aramark has outperformed the market over the past 5 years by 7.43%"
"Aramark to Participate in Upcoming Goldman Sachs Conference"
📈 6D 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 — 89/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish and bearish camps, reflecting starkly different priorities. Samuel Armstrong Nelson, Edgar Lawrence Smith, and Morgan Housel all see ARMK as a compelling long-term opportunity—Nelson highlights its oversold cycle position, while Smith and Housel emphasize its potential as a quiet, decade-spanning compounder. Meanwhile, Charles Mackay and Thorstein Veblen detect early crowd enthusiasm and profit ambiguity, signaling caution, though their scores remain above the midpoint. The divide widens further with investors like Gerald Loeb, Jack Schwager, and Howard Marks, who flag moderate-to-high risk, mixed signals, or overvalued expectations. At the other extreme, Benjamin Graham and Walter Bagehot dismiss ARMK outright—Graham for failing defensive metrics, Bagehot for liquidity concerns—while even the Enterprising Investor variant of Graham’s approach remains skeptical. The contrast underscores whether the stock’s cyclical appeal or speculative traits dominate, with only a few methodologies finding a middle ground.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 89
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 69
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 61
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 58
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)
🟡 58
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 54
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 41
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 41
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 40
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)
🟡 39
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 33
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 11
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
🔴 6
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
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
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 (2 bullish · 8 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
$55.16
Range Bottom
$62.65
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
—
Operating Margin
4.3%
Net Margin
1.8%
EBITDA Margin
6.9%
ROE
10.4%
ROA
2.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.24
Cash
$639.10M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.99
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 19.8.2026 | $0.120 |
| 20.5.2026 | $0.120 |
| 19.5.2026 | $0.120 |
| 18.2.2026 | $0.120 |
| 17.2.2026 | $0.120 |
| 5.12.2025 | $0.120 |
| 4.12.2025 | $0.120 |
| 6.8.2025 | $0.105 |
| 5.8.2025 | $0.105 |
| 14.5.2025 | $0.105 |
| 13.5.2025 | $0.105 |
| 10.2.2025 | $0.105 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$11.78
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$13.47
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
StockStory · 12.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Zacks · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Business Wire · 2.9.2026
Aramark (ARMK) 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.
ARMK 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.
ARMK's technical score is 33/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 23.2%; Net income growth: 24.3%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Current ratio: 0.99; Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — ARMK 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 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KEVERIAN KENNETH M | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 61.449 | +61.449 | — |
| CAMERON SUSAN M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 101.915 | +101.915 | — |
| Heller Bridgette P | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 75.532 | +75.532 | — |
| LOPEZ PATRICIA E | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 61.449 | +61.449 | — |
| Bruno Marc A | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 282.012 | +282.012 | — |
| Creed Greg | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 143.569 | +143.569 | — |
| Harrington Lauren A | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 103.932 | +103.932 | — |
| DelGhiaccio Brian M | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 34.551 | +34.551 | — |
| Schilling Christopher T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 32.911 | +32.911 | — |
| DREILING RICHARD W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 31.364 | +31.364 | — |
| King Karen Marie | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 24.471 | +24.471 | — |
| Tarangelo James J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 61.509 | +61.509 | — |
| Charpentier Abigail | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 96.51 | +96.51 | — |
| ZILLMER JOHN J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 918.023 | +918.023 | — |
| SADOVE STEPHEN I | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 187.656 | +187.656 | — |
| Tarangelo James J. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 8,852 | +8,852 | $24.58 |
| Tarangelo James J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.9.2026 | 6,048 | -6,048 | $56.81 |
| Tarangelo James J. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 8,852 | -8,852 | — |
| Bruno Marc A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.8.2026 | 139,768 | -139,768 | $60.35 |
| Bruno Marc A | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 55,245 | -55,245 | $60.92 |
| Bruno Marc A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.8.2026 | 74,653 | +74,653 | $26.50 |
| Bruno Marc A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.8.2026 | 57,060 | +57,060 | $29.38 |
| Bruno Marc A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.8.2026 | 74,653 | -74,653 | — |
| Bruno Marc A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.8.2026 | 78,689 | -78,689 | — |
| Bruno Marc A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.8.2026 | 57,060 | -57,060 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
8,825,519 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 9,359,966 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
45.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.4% 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