Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$122.24
▼ $0.76 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 06:45 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$5.86B
Day Range
$119.78 - $123.53
52-Week Range
$73.21 - $141.28
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$108.54
Resistance
$141.28
CROX is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+52.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/32 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $180.40 vs. price $122.24 (+47.6%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -2.0% (negative)
Fundamental
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
49
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
26
Quality
42
Value
62
Momentum
58
Risk
42
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
36
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 Crocs, Inc. has highlighted its stock performance, strategic initiatives, and market positioning. The company saw a slight stock price increase amid broader market declines, with analysts noting its brand strength, digital expansion, and product innovation as key growth drivers. Crocs also announced participation in Piper Sandler’s 2026 Growth Frontiers Conference, signaling investor confidence. Additionally, discussions centered on its diversification efforts, share buybacks, and competitive positioning in the footwear sector.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Crocs, Inc.. News trend score: 80. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
23
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
26
Fundamentals
36
Technical
58
Valuation
62
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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.
Price (3M)
-2%
Market Narrative
46
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+11
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests CROX is caught in a herd-driven pullback, with participants mirroring peer declines (-2.7% vs. -2.3%) rather than acting on individual conviction. The anchoring score (54) hints at traders fixating on near-term support (2.3% above), while low FOMO (5) and euphoria (6) scores confirm no urgency or overconfidence. The key question is whether this alignment persists or if a break below support triggers divergence. Narrative and reality scores (gap: -3) imply a slight disconnect, but no clear catalyst is visible.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:49 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Crocs (CROX) closed at $117.42, indicating a +1.22% shift from the previous trading day."
"Crocs Q2 2026 update: diversification stabilizes cash flow and may lift valuation; a $1.5B buyback adds value."
"CROX is strengthening its brands, digital reach and product lineup while cost controls and HEYDUDE changes support growth."
"Crocs stock has delivered a 41.0% gain over the past year, yet valuation checks suggest the shares may still trade below what the company’s cash flows imply."
📈 9D 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
Jesse Livermore — 68/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish and bearish camps, with a few cautious middle-ground approaches. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay’s high scores suggest this stock could be undervalued in a cyclical context or free from speculative frenzy, aligning with their focus on oversold conditions and crowd psychology. Meanwhile, disciplined traders like Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (in his general approach) see a balanced risk/reward setup, though Marks’ cycle-specific model pulls back slightly, indicating it’s neither a peak nor a trough. On the other hand, the overwhelming majority—from Graham’s defensive investor to Fisher’s quality-focused lens—reject the stock outright, flagging issues like valuation, volatility, or lack of growth stability. Even the efficient-market camp dismisses it as unworthy of active picking, while trend-followers like Livermore and risk-averse voices like Loeb and Bagehot warn of structural weaknesses. The debate hinges on whether this stock’s cyclical or technical merits outweigh its fundamental or behavioral red flags.
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 68
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 63
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)
🟡 60
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 58
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 55
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
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 31
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 23
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 21
Cycle looks stretched toward 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
🔴 21
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 19
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)
🔴 14
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 12
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
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (7 bullish · 5 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
58.3%
Operating Margin
3.7%
Net Margin
-2.0%
EBITDA Margin
5.7%
ROE
-6.3%
ROA
-1.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.50
Cash
$130.35M
Total Debt
$1.23B
Current Ratio
1.27
Debt/Equity
0.95
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$122.24
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$180.40
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+47.6%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.5% | $688.84M | $631.96M |
| 2 | 4.0% | $716.37M | $602.95M |
| 3 | 3.5% | $741.43M | $572.52M |
| 4 | 3.0% | $763.66M | $541.00M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $782.76M | $508.74M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$659.20M
Terminal Value
$12.34B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$8.02B
Enterprise Value
$10.88B
Net Debt
$1.10B
Equity Value
$9.78B
*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
$23.86
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$8.04
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 3 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
PR Newswire · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Crocs, Inc. (CROX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
CROX currently scores 49/100 (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, CROX's estimated fair value is $180.40, which is 47.6% above the current price of $122.24. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CROX's technical score is 58/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $180.40 vs. price $122.24 (+47.6%); Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -2.0% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: 0.22 (3y annualized return 12.0% / max drawdown 54.0%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CROX.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 12 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 8,696 | -8,696 | $139.39 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 800 | -800 | $140.02 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 9,576 | -9,576 | $138.38 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 714,093 | -8,696 | $139.39 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 722,789 | -9,576 | $138.38 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 713,293 | -800 | $140.02 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 928 | -928 | $139.04 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 4,204 | -4,204 | $137.96 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 5,796 | -5,796 | $137.41 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 737,497 | -5,796 | $137.41 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 733,293 | -4,204 | $137.96 |
| Rees Andrew | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 732,365 | -928 | $139.04 |
| Rees Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.8.2026 | 200,000 | -200,000 | — |
| Rees Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.8.2026 | 105,610 | -105,610 | $141.19 |
| Rees Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.8.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | $6.98 |
| Rees Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.8.2026 | 675,789 | +200,000 | $6.98 |
| Rees Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.8.2026 | 570,179 | -105,610 | $141.19 |
| Rees Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.8.2026 | 0 | -200,000 | — |
| SMACH THOMAS J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 2,817 | +2,817 | — |
| SMACH THOMAS J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,291 | +1,291 | — |
| TREFF DOUGLAS J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,291 | +1,291 | — |
| TREFF DOUGLAS J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,252 | +1,252 | — |
| TOLMARE NEERAJ | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,095 | +1,095 | — |
| TOLMARE NEERAJ | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,252 | +1,252 | — |
| HUGHES CHARISSE FORD | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 1,252 | +1,252 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,570,493 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,415,345 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
62.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.4% 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