Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$335.10
▲ $2.02 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/21 04:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$330.93 - $335.10
52-Week Range
$299.98 - $421.60
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$330.93
Resistance
$411.19
RL is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+6.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 30.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
83/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+5.7%
Median 40D Outcome
56/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
60%
+5.7% … +8.0%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.3% … -0.3%
🔴 Bearish
33%
-9.6% … -1.6%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 60% (95% CI 36%–80%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.6%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
4 occurrence(s) · 50% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.1% | -0.6% … +6.3% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.7% | -2.1% … +5.3% | +1.0% |
| 20D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.6% | -1.5% … +6.9% | +1.4% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.7% | +1.3% … +16.1% | +3.8% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.1% | +1.0% … +21.8% | +4.8% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-14 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +8.0% | +3.1% |
| 2021-09-21 | 82/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +7.6% | +5.1% |
| 2021-07-29 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +5.6% | +11.8% |
| 2021-06-29 | 81/100 | Consolidation | -5.6% | -1.1% |
| 2021-09-07 | 81/100 | Downtrend | +5.8% | +3.1% |
| 2019-06-04 | 80/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -1.3% | -21.5% |
| 2019-07-24 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -20.7% | -13.4% |
| 2022-04-18 | 78/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -9.6% | -14.8% |
| 2023-08-28 | 78/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -0.3% | +7.0% |
| 2023-10-27 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +14.5% | +29.2% |
| 2021-12-23 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -1.6% | +4.6% |
| 2023-05-11 | 77/100 | Consolidation | +5.7% | +17.3% |
| 2023-10-12 | 77/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +6.2% | +30.3% |
| 2023-09-22 | 76/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +3.3% | +28.0% |
| 2026-03-27 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +13.0% | +26.4% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLY (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
71
Quality
63
Value
50
Momentum
9
Risk
62
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
80
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING RL...
Recent media coverage of Ralph Lauren Corporation has focused on its financial performance and strategic shifts. The brand is noted for strong Q2 earnings driven by tariff refunds and cost savings, alongside digital growth and disciplined spending. Analysts suggest Ralph Lauren’s stock may be poised for a turnaround, citing higher earnings estimates and technical oversold conditions. Additionally, the company appointed Halide Alagoz as its new Chief Operating and Product Officer, while broader industry news highlights potential losses for luxury brands like Ralph Lauren due to Harvey Nichols’ financial wind-down. AI investments are also being explored to enhance customer experience and operational efficiency.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ralph Lauren Corporation. News trend score: 100. Reason: 14 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
75
Fundamentals
80
Technical
9
Valuation
50
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+20
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a **cautious, risk-averse stance**—evidenced by elevated volume (1.27x avg) and negative momentum (-7.1% ROC) without extreme volatility (0.86x ATR). While panic selling is the dominant signal, the absence of euphoria or overconfidence implies traders are neither overly aggressive nor dismissive. The narrative gap (4 points) hints at mild misalignment between sentiment (74) and technical signals, but the key question remains: *Is the volume spike a corrective reaction or a prelude to further downside?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:10 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"analysts revising earnings estimates higher, indicating a potential trend reversal for the stock"
"RL invests in AI, analytics and digital capabilities to improve customer experiences"
"stock trades close to an intrinsic value estimate rather than offering an obvious discount"
📈 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between growth-oriented methodologies and more conservative or value-driven frameworks. The highest-scoring approaches—from Nelson’s cycle analysis (86) to Lynch, Smith, and Schwager (all 83)—emphasize its potential as a high-quality growth candidate, either due to favorable technical positioning, undervalued growth potential, or disciplined risk-reward setups. Meanwhile, Bagehot (75) and Marks (66) lean bullish on liquidity and cyclical positioning, though with slightly more caution. In contrast, Fisher (59) and the efficient-market theorists (55) downgrade it for lacking exceptional quality or clear alpha potential, while Graham’s strict value filters (37) and Livermore’s trend-following rule (28) outright reject it as either unsafe or counter-trend. The split highlights a tension between growth momentum and traditional value metrics, with only a handful of mid-tier methodologies (like Housel’s 49) offering a cautious middle ground.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 83
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
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 75
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
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)
🟢 71
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)
🟢 68
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 64
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 59
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
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)
🟡 55
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)
🟡 52
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 39
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 24
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 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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
69.9%
Operating Margin
14.5%
Net Margin
11.6%
EBITDA Margin
17.4%
ROE
33.1%
ROA
12.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$15.42
Cash
$1.99B
Total Debt
$1.24B
Current Ratio
2.13
Debt/Equity
0.44
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 26.6.2026 | $1.000 |
| 25.6.2026 | $1.000 |
| 27.3.2026 | $0.913 |
| 26.3.2026 | $0.913 |
| 26.12.2025 | $0.913 |
| 25.12.2025 | $0.913 |
| 26.9.2025 | $0.913 |
| 25.9.2025 | $0.913 |
| 27.6.2025 | $0.913 |
| 26.6.2025 | $0.913 |
| 28.3.2025 | $0.825 |
| 27.3.2025 | $0.825 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$45.61
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$29.60
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 14 positive, 4 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Exec Edge · 10.9.2026
Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) 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.
RL 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.
RL's technical score is 9/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 30.1%; Net income growth: 26.7%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — RL 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ranftl Robert P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 2,901 | -2,901 | $377.81 |
| Alagoz Halide | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 923 | -923 | $387.23 |
| Alagoz Halide | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 636 | -636 | $387.23 |
| Alagoz Halide | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 839 | -839 | $387.23 |
| Alagoz Halide | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 2,583 | +2,583 | — |
| Lauren David R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 560 | -560 | $387.23 |
| Louvet Patrice | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 852 | -852 | $387.23 |
| Ranftl Robert P. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 775 | -775 | $387.23 |
| Picicci Justin M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 382 | -382 | $387.23 |
| Lauren David R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 769 | -769 | $387.23 |
| Lauren David R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 382 | -382 | $387.23 |
| Lauren David R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 1,548 | +1,548 | — |
| Louvet Patrice | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,497 | -1,497 | $387.23 |
| Louvet Patrice | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 5,729 | -5,729 | $387.23 |
| Ranftl Robert P. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 913 | -913 | $387.23 |
| Picicci Justin M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,192 | -1,192 | $387.23 |
| Ranftl Robert P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 2,904 | +2,904 | — |
| Louvet Patrice | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 7,875 | -7,875 | $387.23 |
| Louvet Patrice | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 23,241 | +23,241 | — |
| Ranftl Robert P. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 567 | -567 | $387.23 |
| Picicci Justin M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 1,938 | +1,938 | — |
| Louvet Patrice | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 3,260 | -3,260 | $387.23 |
| Picicci Justin M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 671 | -671 | $387.23 |
| Alagoz Halide | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 6,559 | -6,559 | $402.77 |
| Cupp Debra S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 458 | +458 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,929,189 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,918,049 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 44.9% 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