Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$34.21
▲ $0.33 (+1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/23 06:50 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/23/2026
News analyzed: 09/23/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$33.50 - $34.40
52-Week Range
$18.00 - $49.88
Beta
—
Next Earnings
20.10.2026
Support
$32.88
Resistance
$49.88
CVLG is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+53.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is above the 200-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$29.09 vs. price $34.21 (-185.0%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
39
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
34
Quality
42
Value
33
Momentum
38
Risk
34
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
36
Institutional
No data available
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 Covenant Logistics Group (CVLG) has centered on its strategic shift toward higher-return freight and operational diversification amid improving market conditions, as highlighted by its CFO. Analysts have issued mixed but generally positive ratings, with some recommending an "Outperform" stance, while concerns persist over margin recovery despite revenue growth and fleet adjustments. The company also announced a quarterly cash dividend, reinforcing investor confidence. Stock volatility and earnings analysis remain focal points.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Covenant Logistics Group, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
7
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
49
Fundamentals
36
Technical
38
Valuation
33
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-22%
Market Narrative
51
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+16
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
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
Charles Mackay — 84/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for CVLG reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Jack Schwager’s high score suggests a disciplined, high-conviction setup with favorable risk/reward dynamics, aligning with systematic or trend-following principles. Meanwhile, the lowest scorers—like Fisher, Lynch, and Housel—reject the stock outright, either because it lacks the quality/growth traits Fisher prized, fails Lynch’s ‘growth at a reasonable price’ test, or introduces volatility that scares off patient, long-term holders. The middle-ground approaches, such as Marks’ mixed verdict or Nelson’s mid-cycle neutrality, hint at nuanced concerns: while the business may have merit, expectations or market positioning could already be inflated. The extreme caution from Graham, Bagehot, and Loeb underscores structural red flags—defensive criteria failures, liquidity risks, or speculative overreach—whereas Mackay’s relative approval implies no obvious crowd-driven mania. The contrast highlights whether the stock’s appeal lies in technical setups (Schwager) or fundamental flaws (Graham), or whether it’s simply too volatile or overpriced for patient, value-driven investors.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 84
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 82
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 76
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 69
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
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)
🟡 61
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 52
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 27
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 26
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 21
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 19
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)
🔴 14
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)
🔴 10
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
🔴 10
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
Based on the last 284 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 7 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 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
0.3%
Net Margin
0.6%
EBITDA Margin
8.2%
ROE
1.8%
ROA
0.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.28
Cash
$4.95M
Total Debt
$298.05M
Current Ratio
1.11
Debt/Equity
0.74
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 4.9.2026 | $0.070 |
| 5.6.2026 | $0.070 |
| 4.6.2026 | $0.070 |
| 6.3.2026 | $0.070 |
| 5.3.2026 | $0.070 |
| 5.12.2025 | $0.070 |
| 4.12.2025 | $0.070 |
| 5.9.2025 | $0.070 |
| 4.9.2025 | $0.070 |
| 6.6.2025 | $0.070 |
| 5.6.2025 | $0.070 |
| 7.3.2025 | $0.070 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$34.21
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$29.09
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-185.0%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-1.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -1.3% | $-33.48M | $-30.72M |
| 2 | -0.3% | $-33.37M | $-28.09M |
| 3 | 0.6% | $-33.57M | $-25.92M |
| 4 | 1.6% | $-34.09M | $-24.15M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-34.95M | $-22.71M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-33.92M
Terminal Value
$-551.08M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-358.16M
Enterprise Value
$-489.76M
Net Debt
$293.11M
Equity Value
$-782.87M
*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
$15.01
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.10
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 7 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 29.8.2026
MarketBeat · 29.8.2026
Zacks · 20.8.2026
Fintel · 20.8.2026
Benzinga · 20.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 17.8.2026
StockStory · 15.8.2026
Zacks · 12.8.2026
StockStory · 12.8.2026
Motley Fool · 8.8.2026
Zacks · 4.8.2026
Fintel · 4.8.2026
FreightWaves · 3.8.2026
Benzinga · 31.7.2026
MarketBeat · 31.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.7.2026
Covenant Logistics Group, Inc. (CVLG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, 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.
CVLG currently scores 39/100 (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, CVLG's estimated fair value is -$29.09, which is 185.0% below the current price of $34.21. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CVLG's technical score is 38/100, 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: Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; CMF 20 days: 0.11.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$29.09 vs. price $34.21 (-185.0%); Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.1% of price.
Yes — CVLG 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grant James S III | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,524 | -3,524 | — |
| BUNN PAUL | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 7,230 | +7,230 | — |
| Grant James S III | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 1,423 | -1,423 | $44.83 |
| Grant James S III | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,615 | -3,615 | — |
| BUNN PAUL | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 7,230 | -7,230 | — |
| Koehl Dustin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,253 | -3,253 | — |
| Koehl Dustin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,820 | +2,820 | — |
| BUNN PAUL | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 3,206 | -3,206 | $44.83 |
| Ballard Joey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,114 | -2,114 | — |
| Grant James S III | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,524 | +3,524 | — |
| Grant James S III | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,615 | +3,615 | — |
| Koehl Dustin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 3,253 | +3,253 | — |
| Ballard Joey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,892 | -2,892 | — |
| Koehl Dustin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 687 | -687 | $44.83 |
| Grant James S III | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 1,387 | -1,387 | $44.83 |
| Koehl Dustin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 793 | -793 | $44.83 |
| BUNN PAUL | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 7,050 | -7,050 | — |
| Ballard Joey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,114 | +2,114 | — |
| Koehl Dustin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,820 | -2,820 | — |
| BUNN PAUL | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 7,050 | +7,050 | — |
| Ballard Joey | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 832 | -832 | $44.83 |
| BUNN PAUL | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 3,126 | -3,126 | $44.83 |
| Ballard Joey | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 1,138 | -1,138 | $44.83 |
| Ballard Joey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,892 | +2,892 | — |
| BUNN PAUL | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 205,943 | +7,050 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,137,978 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 653,929 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
56.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.1% 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