Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$47.54
▼ $4.45 (-8.6%)
Market data updated: 09/16 02:16 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$2.74B
Day Range
$47.42 - $49.89
52-Week Range
$35.71 - $69.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
CXT is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-17.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/30 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -4.9% / max drawdown 47.6%)
Risk
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
56
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
58
Value
50
Momentum
59
Risk
42
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
60
Institutional
100
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 Crane NXT, Co. has centered on its strategic leadership and upcoming financial discussions, with no substantive operational or financial performance details. The company announced participation in the **2026 Jefferies Global Industrial Conference**, featuring a fireside chat with its CEO and CFO, alongside broader analyst interest in industrial stocks. Additionally, Crane NXT highlighted a **new executive appointment**: Jason Lund was named President of Crane Payment Innovations and Group President of its Detection and Traceability Technologies segment, signaling internal restructuring and growth focus. No earnings or revenue figures were reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Crane NXT, Co.. 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
8
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
10
Fundamentals
60
Technical
59
Valuation
50
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
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)
+16%
Market Narrative
48
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests traders are *primarily herding*—aligning CXT’s modest gains with peer movements—while mild FOMO and euphoria indicate speculative interest. Overconfidence may arise from momentum decoupling from EPS growth, and the 18-point narrative gap hints at optimism exceeding fundamentals. The key question: *Is this alignment structural or a temporary momentum-driven convergence?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:16 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Crane NXT announced Jason Lund as President of Crane Payment Innovations and Group President of Detection and Traceability Technologies"
"Crane NXT to participate in the 2026 Jefferies Global Industrial Conference with CEO and CFO fireside chat"
"Specialized Technology Stocks Q2 Teardown: Crane NXT (NYSE:CXT) Vs The Rest"
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 — 83/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Charles Mackay’s documented principles, the model estimates that the lack of crowd mania yields a relatively high score of 73, while Edgar Lawrence Smith’s long‑term buy‑and‑hold criteria also rate the stock favorably at 66. In contrast, value‑oriented frameworks such as Benjamin Graham’s defensive criteria and the Enterprising Investor’s safety margin assign low scores of 29 and 22, reflecting concerns over price relative to intrinsic value. Growth‑focused thinkers like Philip Fisher and Peter Lynch sit near the middle, noting solid but not exceptional quality and a failure to meet growth‑at‑reasonable‑price thresholds, respectively. Risk‑sensitive approaches from Loeb, Bagehot and Marks highlight liquidity and risk concerns, resulting in modest to low scores, which explains the overall spread of opinions across the methodologies.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 83
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 66
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 63
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 58
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 53
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 51
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 48
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 46
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 38
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 37
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 35
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 34
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 24
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 276 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 3 bearish · 3 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
42.5%
Operating Margin
14.9%
Net Margin
8.8%
EBITDA Margin
21.3%
ROE
11.6%
ROA
4.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.53
Cash
$233.80M
Total Debt
$1.14B
Current Ratio
1.50
Debt/Equity
0.91
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 31.8.2026 | $0.180 |
| 29.5.2026 | $0.180 |
| 28.5.2026 | $0.180 |
| 27.2.2026 | $0.180 |
| 26.2.2026 | $0.180 |
| 28.11.2025 | $0.170 |
| 27.11.2025 | $0.170 |
| 29.8.2025 | $0.170 |
| 28.8.2025 | $0.170 |
| 30.5.2025 | $0.170 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.170 |
| 28.2.2025 | $0.170 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$47.54
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$44.58
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-6.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.4%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.4% | $212.93M | $195.35M |
| 2 | 6.2% | $226.04M | $190.25M |
| 3 | 4.9% | $237.20M | $183.16M |
| 4 | 3.7% | $246.02M | $174.29M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $252.17M | $163.89M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$198.30M
Terminal Value
$3.98B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.58B
Enterprise Value
$3.49B
Net Debt
$905.70M
Equity Value
$2.59B
*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
$21.60
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$8.07
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 9 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
StockStory · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 24.8.2026
Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 56/100, 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.
CXT currently scores 56/100 (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, CXT's estimated fair value is $44.58, which is 6.2% below the current price of $47.54. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CXT's technical score is 59/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -4.9% / max drawdown 47.6%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -21.6%; Net income growth: -21.2%.
Yes — CXT 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 — 4 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cristiano Christina | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 3,550 | +3,550 | $41.96 |
| Saak Aaron W | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 24,000 | +24,000 | $42.13 |
| Cristiano Christina | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 14,663 | +3,550 | $41.96 |
| Saak Aaron W | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 64,595 | +24,000 | $42.13 |
| Joyce Sandra | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 70 | +70 | — |
| Stroup John S | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 210 | +210 | — |
| Grogan William K | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 6,366 | +6,366 | — |
| Benck Jeff | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 4,837 | +4,837 | — |
| Kogl Cristen L | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 4,119 | +4,119 | — |
| TULLIS JAMES L L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.5.2026 | 4,654 | -4,654 | — |
| Stroup John S | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 7,364 | +7,364 | — |
| DINKINS MICHAEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 193 | +193 | — |
| Kogl Cristen L | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 133 | +133 | — |
| DINKINS MICHAEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 4,119 | +4,119 | — |
| TULLIS JAMES L L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.5.2026 | 4,654 | +4,654 | — |
| Joyce Sandra | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 4,119 | +4,119 | — |
| PETRATIS DAVID D | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 5,243 | +5,243 | — |
| PETRATIS DAVID D | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 131 | +131 | — |
| HAIME ELLEN MCCLAIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 4,569 | +4,569 | — |
| Grogan William K | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 126 | +126 | — |
| TULLIS JAMES L L | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 448 | +448 | — |
| HAIME ELLEN MCCLAIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 343 | +343 | — |
| DINKINS MICHAEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 19,661 | +4,119 | — |
| DINKINS MICHAEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 19,854 | +193 | — |
| HAIME ELLEN MCCLAIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 33,203 | +4,569 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
8,009,245 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 7,352,249 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
85.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 79.6% 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