Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$287.16
▲ $3.51 (+1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/17 10:03 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$6.08B
Day Range
$283.06 - $293.18
52-Week Range
$202.00 - $390.42
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
NPO is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+32.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/31 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
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
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $90.12 vs. price $287.16 (-68.6%)
Fair Value
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
47
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
45
Quality
63
Value
33
Momentum
22
Risk
62
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
59
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of **Enpro Inc. (NPO)** has highlighted its strong long-term stock performance, with consistent outperformance over 10 and 15 years, averaging annual returns of **18.15%** and **15.14%**, respectively. Analysts have praised its earnings momentum in Q2, calling it "firing on all cylinders," while price targets were raised by **10.91%**, positioning it as a Wall Street favorite. Comparisons with peers and dividend activity also drew attention, though some caution was noted regarding analyst optimism.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Enpro Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
59
Technical
22
Valuation
33
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 significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-24%
Market Narrative
66
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+24
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peers rather than fundamentals, as both NPO and its sector moved in tandem today. Overconfidence and euphoria coexist despite weak momentum, indicating investors may be anchoring to the stock’s extreme valuation (+230% above DCF) rather than recent price action. The narrative gap (11 points) hints at a disconnect between investor optimism and technical reality, but the lack of panic or FOMO signals suggests caution rather than urgency. The key question remains whether this synchronized movement reflects genuine conviction or merely a temporary alignment.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:00 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"$1000 invested 10 years ago would be worth significantly more due to 18.15% average annual return (Benzinga #1)."
"Price target increased by 10.91% to $383.52 (Fintel #6)."
"One of Wall Street’s favorite stocks to keep an eye on (Yahoo #7)."
"Wall Street analysts think 26.16% upside potential (Yahoo #11)."
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 26/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two stark camps: the bullish camp, led by technical and cyclical analysts, and the bearish camp, dominated by fundamentalists and contrarians. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score and verdict suggest the stock is in a favorable cycle position, while Charles Mackay and Jack Schwager’s high scores imply it lacks crowd-driven mania or speculative excess—both seeing disciplined, reward-rich opportunities. Meanwhile, investors like Edgar Lawrence Smith and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) view it as a long-term hold or early-cycle play, reinforcing a growth-oriented or cyclical bull case. However, the fundamentalists—from Benjamin Graham to Philip Fisher—reject it outright, with Graham and Livermore flagging it as statistically uncheap or trending against the market, while Fisher and Lynch dismiss it for lacking the quality or growth premiums they demanded. The divide hinges on whether the stock’s strength lies in its technical/cyclical momentum (high scores) or its fundamental flaws (low scores), with no middle ground between the two extremes.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 77
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 72
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 62
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 61
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 60
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 57
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 47
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 45
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 39
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 36
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 30
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 26
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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.
High 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
42.6%
Operating Margin
14.1%
Net Margin
3.5%
EBITDA Margin
23.1%
ROE
2.6%
ROA
1.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.92
Cash
$114.70M
Total Debt
$655.30M
Current Ratio
2.32
Debt/Equity
0.42
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 2.9.2026 | $0.320 |
| 3.6.2026 | $0.320 |
| 2.6.2026 | $0.320 |
| 4.3.2026 | $0.320 |
| 3.3.2026 | $0.320 |
| 3.12.2025 | $0.310 |
| 2.12.2025 | $0.310 |
| 3.9.2025 | $0.310 |
| 2.9.2025 | $0.310 |
| 4.6.2025 | $0.310 |
| 3.6.2025 | $0.310 |
| 5.3.2025 | $0.310 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$287.16
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$90.12
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-68.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
1.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.5% | $161.53M | $148.19M |
| 2 | 1.7% | $164.31M | $138.30M |
| 3 | 2.0% | $167.57M | $129.39M |
| 4 | 2.2% | $171.32M | $121.37M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $175.61M | $114.13M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$159.20M
Terminal Value
$2.77B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$1.80B
Enterprise Value
$2.45B
Net Debt
$540.60M
Equity Value
$1.91B
*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
$72.83
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$22.60
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 12 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 28.8.2026
Fintel · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
StockStory · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
StockStory · 18.8.2026
Enpro Inc. (NPO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
NPO currently scores 47/100 (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, NPO's estimated fair value is $90.12, which is 68.6% below the current price of $287.16. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
NPO's technical score is 22/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Debt/equity: 0.42; Current ratio: 2.32.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $90.12 vs. price $287.16 (-68.6%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -44.6%; Net income growth: -44.4%.
Yes — NPO 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abbey William | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 66.325 | +66.325 | $376.93 |
| Reinsdorf Judith A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 74 | +74 | $376.93 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 57.448 | +57.448 | $376.93 |
| Abbey William | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,598 | +66 | $376.93 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 18,051 | +57 | $376.93 |
| Reinsdorf Judith A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,184 | +74 | $376.93 |
| Abbey William | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 1.347 | +1.347 | $363.62 |
| Brueck Felix M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 8.856 | +8.856 | $363.62 |
| Gulfo Adele M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 0.453 | +0.453 | $363.62 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 2.619 | +2.619 | $363.62 |
| Humphrey John | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 11.102 | +11.102 | $363.62 |
| Brueck Felix M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 11 | +11 | $363.62 |
| Gulfo Adele M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 4 | +4 | $363.62 |
| Humphrey John | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 8 | +8 | $363.62 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 13 | +13 | $363.62 |
| Reinsdorf Judith A | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 0.596 | +0.596 | $363.62 |
| Abbey William | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 1,532 | +1 | $363.62 |
| Brueck Felix M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 22,043 | +11 | $363.62 |
| Brueck Felix M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 22,052 | +9 | $363.62 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 17,991 | +13 | $363.62 |
| Botts Thomas M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 17,994 | +3 | $363.62 |
| Gulfo Adele M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 5,276 | +4 | $363.62 |
| Gulfo Adele M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 5,277 | +0 | $363.62 |
| Humphrey John | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 17,861 | +11 | $363.62 |
| Humphrey John | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 17,869 | +8 | $363.62 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
495,435 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 447,413 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
67.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 68.3% 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