Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$63.51
▼ $1.03 (-1.6%)
Market data updated: 09/15 09:32 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/10/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$63.25 - $64.76
52-Week Range
$53.15 - $83.43
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
-18.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 23.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (74/100), 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 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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
50
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
74
Quality
42
Value
45
Momentum
13
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
62
Institutional
91
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 Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR) has centered on its strong financial growth and investor optimism. Analysts highlight a potential 25% stock rally, citing upward earnings revisions and robust technical setups, including a breakout above $79.36. LOAR is frequently noted as a standout aerospace and defense stock with high EPS growth (91%) and favorable trading momentum, though broader aerospace sector comparisons are also mentioned. The company’s prominence in analyst portfolios—particularly with LOAR comprising 47% of one major investor’s holdings—further underscores its perceived value.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Loar Holdings Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 16 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 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)
36
Psychology
92
Fundamentals
62
Technical
13
Valuation
45
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-7%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
LOAR’s psychology profile is fragmented, with **anchoring (36)** dominating due to proximity to support (3.2% above), implying traders may resist downward moves despite weak momentum (-9.0% ROC) and neutral RSI (36). The **narrative gap (18)**—where sentiment (100/100) vastly exceeds technical signals—suggests a disconnect between optimism and reality, possibly fueling cautious FOMO (10) or euphoria (19) without conviction. The absence of panic (23) or herding (0) hints at a scattered, non-cohesive approach. The key question: *Will traders break free from the 3.2% anchor, or will they double down on selective optimism?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 08:09 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"potential upside of 25.3% in Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR)"
"Loar Holdings posts record Q2 results, raises 2026 guidance"
"LOAR HOLDINGS shows strong growth momentum with 91% EPS growth, solid technicals"
"LOAR (47%) biggest stake in David Abrams’s Q2 2026 13F portfolio"
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 11/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with some models seeing strong potential while others flag significant caution. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Peter Lynch both rate it highly—Nelson’s cycle analysis suggests it’s near oversold, while Lynch sees it as an underappreciated growth play. Meanwhile, Walter Bagehot and Charles Mackay offer qualified support, praising liquidity and the absence of crowd-driven hype, though neither is overwhelmingly bullish. On the other end, Benjamin Graham (both his strict and enterprising frameworks) and Philip Fisher are lukewarm, dismissing it as neither a deep bargain nor an exceptional quality stock. The most bearish voices—Jesse Livermore and Morgan Housel—reject it outright, with Livermore’s trend-following rule and Housel’s volatility concerns casting doubt on its stability. The split reflects a tension between cyclical timing (Nelson, Lynch) and fundamental or structural critiques (Graham, Fisher), while efficiency-market skeptics and volatility-focused thinkers remain outright skeptical.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 98
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 90
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 86
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 66
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 57
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 56
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)
🟡 54
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
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 45
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 33
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
🔴 31
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 27
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 11
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
Based on the last 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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.
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
53.4%
Operating Margin
21.4%
Net Margin
14.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.1%
ROA
3.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.77
Cash
$84.83M
Total Debt
$715.70M
Current Ratio
4.70
Debt/Equity
0.61
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$12.55
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$6.07
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 16 positive, 4 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Zacks · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 27.8.2026
ChartMill · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 18.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.8.2026
ChartMill · 15.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.8.2026
MarketBeat · 8.8.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
Moby · 7.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, 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.
LOAR currently scores 50/100 (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.
LOAR's technical score is 13/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 23.2%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 212.5%; Net income growth: 224.5%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.2% of price; Calmar: 0.25 (3y annualized return 11.7% / max drawdown 46.0%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for LOAR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 20 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Danmola Taiwo K. | Open Market Sale | 20.5.2026 | 35,000 | -35,000 | $60.59 |
| Danmola Taiwo K. | Open Market Sale | 20.5.2026 | 54,286 | -35,000 | $60.59 |
| LEVY PAUL S | Open Market Purchase | 13.3.2026 | 75,000 | +75,000 | $64.90 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 13.3.2026 | 50 | +50 | $64.70 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 13.3.2026 | 4,800 | +50 | $64.70 |
| LEVY PAUL S | Open Market Purchase | 13.3.2026 | 8,087,580 | +75,000 | $64.90 |
| Bobbili Raja | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 20,000 | +20,000 | $62.76 |
| Bobbili Raja | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 30,000 | +30,000 | $64.17 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 36,434 | +36,434 | $67.45 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 3,490 | +3,490 | $65.16 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 1,260 | +1,260 | $64.45 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 4,087,005 | +36,434 | $67.45 |
| Bobbili Raja | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 20,000 | +20,000 | $62.76 |
| Bobbili Raja | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 50,000 | +30,000 | $64.17 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 1,260 | +1,260 | $64.45 |
| Carpenito Anthony | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 4,750 | +3,490 | $65.16 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 4,087,005 | +36,434 | $67.45 |
| McGetrick Margaret A | Gift | 11.3.2026 | 71,429 | -71,429 | — |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 11.3.2026 | 4,166 | +4,166 | $67.49 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 11.3.2026 | 4,050,571 | +4,166 | $67.49 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 11.3.2026 | 4,050,571 | +4,166 | $67.49 |
| McGetrick Margaret A | Gift | 11.3.2026 | 17,857 | -71,429 | — |
| Manella Michael J. | Gift | 10.3.2026 | 429,960 | -429,960 | — |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 10.3.2026 | 3,400 | +3,400 | $67.41 |
| Charles Dirkson R | Open Market Purchase | 10.3.2026 | 4,046,405 | +3,400 | $67.41 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,114,418 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,071,850 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
73.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 68.7% 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