Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$40.27
▲ $0.23 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/21 12:56 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
$4.43B
Day Range
$39.36 - $40.58
52-Week Range
$29.28 - $59.19
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$37.20
Resistance
$48.21
-24.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/25 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 21.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 0.98
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
48
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
60
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
31
Risk
28
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
37
Institutional
25
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 Ryan Specialty Holdings (RYAN) has highlighted its strong financial performance and market positioning, particularly emphasizing its cash-generating capabilities and growth potential. Analysts like Morgan Stanley have maintained an optimistic outlook, raising the price target to $50, while noting its competitive advantages as a small-cap stock. Discussions also revolve around its long-term shareholder returns—up 45.8% over five years—though some suggest its valuation may now be fully priced amid market scrutiny. AI’s role in enhancing rather than replacing its operations was also noted as a key differentiator.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ryan Specialty Holdings, Inc.. News trend score: 92. Reason: 9 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
19
Fundamentals
37
Technical
31
Valuation
50
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)
+15%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 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 independent analysis, given RYAN’s parallel decline with its sector. The narrative gap (51 vs. 41) hints at a disconnect between investor perceptions and fundamentals, while euphoria’s presence—despite weak momentum—implies lingering optimism anchored to historical averages. The key question is whether this synchronized movement reflects rational positioning or a delayed reaction to deteriorating fundamentals. Low volatility and muted panic signals may mask deeper uncertainty, but the absence of overconfidence or loss aversion suggests traders remain cautiously neutral.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:49 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"AI is Sharpening Ryan Specialty Holdings (RYAN), Not Replacing Them"
"Free cash flow is one of the most reliable indicators of financial durability"
"Investors looking for hidden gems should keep an eye on small-cap stocks"
"Ryan Specialty Holdings stock has delivered a 45.8% gain... yet the latest valuation checks lean closer to expensive than cheap"
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 — 74/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with scores ranging from a near-perfect 98 to a resounding 0. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests the stock is in a favorable cycle position, closer to oversold than overbought, while Edgar Lawrence Smith and Philip Fisher see it as a solid long-term hold—though Fisher stops short of calling it exceptional. Meanwhile, the more cautious voices, like Benjamin Graham and Walter Bagehot, dismiss it outright, with Graham calling it a failure of defensive criteria and Bagehot flagging liquidity risks. The middle ground is occupied by investors like Peter Lynch and Charles Mackay, who see mixed signals—growth potential but with valuation already pricing in much of it, or crowd excitement that could signal overvaluation. This stark contrast reflects a tension between cyclical optimism, long-term fundamentals, and deep skepticism about risk and market efficiency.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 74
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)
🟢 69
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 68
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 65
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 60
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 54
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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)
🔴 34
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 33
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 31
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 26
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 18
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 16
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 10
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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 (1 bullish · 6 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.
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
—
Operating Margin
16.2%
Net Margin
2.1%
EBITDA Margin
16.2%
ROE
9.8%
ROA
0.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$158.32M
Total Debt
$3.35B
Current Ratio
0.98
Debt/Equity
5.17
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 11.8.2026 | $0.130 |
| 12.5.2026 | $0.130 |
| 11.5.2026 | $0.130 |
| 24.2.2026 | $0.130 |
| 23.2.2026 | $0.130 |
| 10.11.2025 | $0.120 |
| 9.11.2025 | $0.120 |
| 12.8.2025 | $0.120 |
| 11.8.2025 | $0.120 |
| 13.5.2025 | $0.120 |
| 12.5.2025 | $0.120 |
| 4.3.2025 | $0.120 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 9 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
MarketBeat · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 25.8.2026
Benzinga · 19.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
StockStory · 17.8.2026
Yahoo · 16.8.2026
StockStory · 16.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 14.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
Ryan Specialty Holdings, Inc. (RYAN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
RYAN currently scores 48/100 (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.
RYAN's technical score is 31/100, 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): 21.3%; Free cash flow growth: 23.1%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Current ratio: 0.98; Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -6.3% / max drawdown 61.3%); Net income growth: -33.0%.
Yes — RYAN 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 — 1 purchases and 3 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MULSHINE BRENDAN MARTIN | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 40,000 | -40,000 | $40.51 |
| MULSHINE BRENDAN MARTIN | Conversion of Derivative Security | 4.9.2026 | 40,000 | -40,000 | — |
| MULSHINE BRENDAN MARTIN | Conversion of Derivative Security | 4.9.2026 | 40,000 | +40,000 | — |
| MULSHINE BRENDAN MARTIN | Conversion of Derivative Security | 4.9.2026 | 40,000 | -40,000 | — |
| CORTEZI NICHOLAS DOMINIC | Other Transaction | 14.8.2026 | 313,116 | -313,116 | — |
| CORTEZI NICHOLAS DOMINIC | Other Transaction | 14.8.2026 | 313,116 | -313,116 | — |
| CORTEZI NICHOLAS DOMINIC | Other Transaction | 14.8.2026 | 1,841,019 | -1,841,019 | — |
| CORTEZI NICHOLAS DOMINIC | Other Transaction | 14.8.2026 | 1,841,019 | -1,841,019 | — |
| Conklin Michael | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 2,043 | -2,043 | $42.26 |
| Conklin Michael | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 8,153 | -2,043 | $42.26 |
| Bienen Henry S | Gift | 10.8.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | — |
| Bienen Henry S | Gift | 10.8.2026 | 24,795 | -3,000 | — |
| RYAN PATRICK G | Disposition to the Company | 4.8.2026 | 287,646 | +287,646 | — |
| Keogh Stephen Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 22,920 | +22,920 | — |
| Conklin Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 22,920 | +22,920 | — |
| RYAN PATRICK G | Disposition to the Company | 4.8.2026 | 287,646 | +287,646 | — |
| Conklin Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 22,920 | +22,920 | — |
| Keogh Stephen Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 22,920 | +22,920 | — |
| Hamilton Janice M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 1,706 | -1,706 | $40.89 |
| Hamilton Janice M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 5,821 | +5,821 | — |
| Hamilton Janice M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 5,821 | -5,821 | — |
| Hamilton Janice M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 20,395 | +5,821 | — |
| Hamilton Janice M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 18,689 | -1,706 | $40.89 |
| Hamilton Janice M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 40,747 | -5,821 | — |
| Kuczinski Anthony J | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | $35.77 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
13,411,299 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 13,192,760 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.1% 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