Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$34.45
▲ $0.82 (+2.4%)
Market data updated: 09/25 01:30 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/25/2026
News analyzed: 09/25/2026
Market Cap
$372.75M
Day Range
$34.06 - $35.01
52-Week Range
$21.93 - $43.60
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.12.2026
Support
$32.26
Resistance
$40.49
GCO is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+6.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/31 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $128.94 vs. price $34.45 (+274.3%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.4% of price
Risk
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
58
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
76
Quality
63
Value
67
Momentum
36
Risk
46
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
54
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 Genesco Inc. has centered on its Q2 2027 earnings performance, highlighting improved profitability despite lower sales, driven by strategic investments in its brands—particularly Journeys and Johnston & Murphy. The company emphasized its ability to avoid the challenges faced by competitors like Foot Locker and JD Sports, while also announcing Peyton Manning’s return as a brand ambassador for Johnston & Murphy. Stock reactions and investor discussions reflected optimism over long-term growth strategies.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Genesco Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
12
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
14
Fundamentals
54
Technical
36
Valuation
67
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-2%
Market Narrative
45
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests herding is the dominant psychological force, as GCO’s outperformance relative to peers (+4.0% vs. +1.3%) aligns with coordinated buying. FOMO remains elevated due to momentum, volume, and positive sentiment, but the narrative gap (7-point discrepancy) hints at potential misalignment between investor enthusiasm and fundamentals. Euphoria is present but tempered by the stock’s deep discount to DCF (-72%), limiting extreme risk-taking. The key question is whether herding will sustain momentum or if sentiment-driven buying will fade as valuation gaps widen.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 07:52 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Journeys and Johnston & Murphy Continue to Drive Growth"
"Margin gains and Strategic Brand Investments Offset Lower Sales"
"Genesco Shares Climb After Q2 Earnings Beat"
"Peyton Manning Returns as Johnston & Murphy Brand Ambassador"
📈 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
Peter Lynch — 84/100
🔴 Weakest match
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 39/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies diverge sharply on GCO, with Peter Lynch and Thorstein Veblen standing out as the most bullish—both scoring above 70 and framing it as a growth opportunity, either because the stock hasn’t fully priced in its potential (Lynch) or because its growth aligns with tangible value creation (Veblen). Meanwhile, Benjamin Graham’s two variants (Defensive and Enterprising Investor) and Philip Fisher’s standards are far more cautious, scoring in the mid-50s to low-60s, suggesting the stock lacks the deep margin-of-safety or exceptional quality they prioritize. At the opposite end, Nelson’s cyclical analysis and Bagehot’s liquidity concerns paint a starkly negative picture, scoring just 25 and 43 respectively, while Livermore’s neutral stance and Schwager’s indecision reflect a lack of clear directional conviction. The divide highlights a tension between growth-focused and value-driven approaches, with even moderate risk-aware investors like Marks and Housel sitting in the middle, acknowledging holdability but not effortlessness.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 84
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 74
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
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)
🟢 72
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 66
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 61
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 58
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
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 53
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 49
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 47
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 47
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 43
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 39
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
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 bearish · 2 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
46.3%
Operating Margin
0.7%
Net Margin
0.5%
EBITDA Margin
2.9%
ROE
2.3%
ROA
1.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.28
Cash
$105.41M
Total Debt
$3.38M
Current Ratio
1.64
Debt/Equity
0.01
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$34.45
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$128.94
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+274.3%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
0.8%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.8% | $84.34M | $77.37M |
| 2 | 1.2% | $85.34M | $71.83M |
| 3 | 1.6% | $86.73M | $66.97M |
| 4 | 2.1% | $88.52M | $62.71M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $90.74M | $58.97M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$83.71M
Terminal Value
$1.43B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$929.95M
Enterprise Value
$1.27B
Net Debt
$-102.03M
Equity Value
$1.37B
*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
$53.37
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$49.86
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 8 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Motley Fool · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
TheStreet · 8.9.2026
Genesco Inc. (GCO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, 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.
GCO currently scores 58/100 (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, GCO's estimated fair value is $128.94, which is 274.3% above the current price of $34.45. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
GCO's technical score is 36/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $128.94 vs. price $34.45 (+274.3%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 171.8%; Free cash flow growth: 79.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.4% of price; Calmar: 0.08 (3y annualized return 5.1% / max drawdown 60.9%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for GCO.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 3 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collins Jonathan M. | Open Market Purchase | 21.9.2026 | 11,719 | +295 | $33.84 |
| Collins Jonathan M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 11,424 | +11,424 | — |
| Collins Jonathan M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 11,424 | +11,424 | — |
| SANDFORT GREGORY A | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| MARSHALL THURGOOD JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| Barsh Joanna | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| MARTINEZ ANGEL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| Bilunas Matthew M | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| Bojanowski Carolyn | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| Lambros John F | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| Meixelsperger Mary E | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 3,905 | +3,905 | — |
| MARTINEZ ANGEL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 24,250 | +3,905 | — |
| MARSHALL THURGOOD JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 36,644 | +3,905 | — |
| SANDFORT GREGORY A | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 22,535 | +3,905 | — |
| Barsh Joanna | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 49,802 | +3,905 | — |
| Meixelsperger Mary E | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 27,535 | +3,905 | — |
| Bilunas Matthew M | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 19,006 | +3,905 | — |
| Lambros John F | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 23,705 | +3,905 | — |
| Bojanowski Carolyn | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 19,006 | +3,905 | — |
| SANDFORT GREGORY A | Open Market Purchase | 9.7.2026 | 2,958 | +2,958 | $33.80 |
| SANDFORT GREGORY A | Open Market Purchase | 9.7.2026 | 29,172 | +2,958 | $33.80 |
| Desai Parag | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 547 | -547 | $36.18 |
| VAUGHN MIMI ECKEL | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 4,847 | -4,847 | $36.18 |
| Ewoldsen Daniel E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 373 | -373 | $36.18 |
| Becker Scott E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 486 | -486 | $36.18 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,282,363 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 1,098,722 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
74.4% 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