Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$175.41
▼ $1.07 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 03:28 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$22.98B
Day Range
$173.75 - $178.37
52-Week Range
$155.94 - $253.35
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$171.79
Resistance
$226.08
VRSK is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-29.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 29.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $119.79 vs. price $175.41 (-31.7%)
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
41
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
48
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
36
Sentiment
26
Fundamental
71
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING VRSK...
Recent coverage of Verisk Analytics has centered on its market performance and analyst outlook, with Barclays maintaining an Overweight rating but lowering its price target to $225, while a Barchart article questions whether the stock is underperforming the Industrials sector. The company also highlighted product innovation with the launch of Verisk Fraud Discovery, a unified fraud prevention platform, and released new CargoNet analysis on persistent Labor Day cargo theft across U.S. freight networks.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Verisk Analytics. News trend score: 26. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are negative, versus 7 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
47
Fundamentals
71
Technical
13
Valuation
38
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 (3M)
+2%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
-4
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
VRSK’s psychology is anchored by its 1.1% distance from support, suggesting traders fixate on this level despite weak momentum and muted volume. Overconfidence persists due to the +46% DCF premium, decoupling price from fundamentals. The narrative-reality gap (-3) hints at a slight disconnect between market perception and fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will hold or adjust positions as the stock tests support—no clear breakout or breakdown yet. The dominant bias remains anchored to the support level, but overconfidence could delay corrective action.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:34 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Verisk announced Verisk Fraud Discovery, a fraud prevention platform that unifies fraud intelligence, advanced analytics"
"Verisk launched a new U.S. Data Center Exposure Database designed to help insurers manage risk concentrations"
"Verisk CargoNet analyzed 273 theft events over five years, finding elevated baseline theft activity"
📈 14D 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 — 90/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing it as a compelling opportunity while others flag it as a high-risk or overvalued bet. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay both rate it highly, with Nelson calling its cycle position favorable and Mackay spotting no crowd mania—suggesting a contrarian or undervalued edge. Meanwhile, Fisher and Marks (Market Cycle) lean bullish, praising its quality and positioning it early-to-mid cycle, implying strong fundamentals and room to grow. However, the majority of models—especially Graham, Livermore, and Loeb—pile on red flags, with Graham dismissing it outright as too risky and Livermore warning against trading against the trend. Even moderate voices like Smith and Schwager hesitate, calling it reasonable but not a clear long-term hold or lacking a decisive edge. The contrast highlights a stock that excites growth-oriented or cyclical investors but fails the rigorous defensive or value screens of traditional fundamentalists.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 90
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 75
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 50
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)
🟡 47
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 42
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 23
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 22
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)
🔴 18
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 12
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)
🔴 9
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 2
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 (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.
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
69.9%
Operating Margin
43.7%
Net Margin
29.6%
EBITDA Margin
52.2%
ROE
293.9%
ROA
14.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.50
Cash
$2.18B
Total Debt
$6.28B
Current Ratio
1.20
Debt/Equity
20.33
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.6.2026 | $0.500 |
| 14.6.2026 | $0.500 |
| 13.3.2026 | $0.500 |
| 12.3.2026 | $0.500 |
| 15.12.2025 | $0.450 |
| 14.12.2025 | $0.450 |
| 15.9.2025 | $0.450 |
| 14.9.2025 | $0.450 |
| 13.6.2025 | $0.450 |
| 12.6.2025 | $0.450 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.450 |
| 13.3.2025 | $0.450 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$175.41
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$119.79
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-31.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.2% | $1.28B | $1.17B |
| 2 | 6.0% | $1.35B | $1.14B |
| 3 | 4.8% | $1.42B | $1.10B |
| 4 | 3.7% | $1.47B | $1.04B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.51B | $980.11M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.19B
Terminal Value
$23.78B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$15.46B
Enterprise Value
$20.89B
Net Debt
$4.10B
Equity Value
$16.78B
*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
$2.21
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$13.68
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 2 neutral, 11 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Barchart · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 8.9.2026
Verisk Analytics (VRSK) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
VRSK currently scores 41/100 (Weak) 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, VRSK's estimated fair value is $119.79, which is 31.7% below the current price of $175.41. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
VRSK'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: Free cash flow growth: 29.5%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 293.9% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $119.79 vs. price $175.41 (-31.7%); Calmar: -0.21 (3y annualized return -10.5% / max drawdown 51.2%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -3.4%.
Yes — VRSK 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 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 3,535 | -3,535 | — |
| Shavel Lee | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,535 | -3,535 | $193.43 |
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 3,535 | +3,535 | $104.00 |
| Mann Elizabeth | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 400 | -400 | $179.95 |
| Shavel Lee | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 3,535 | -3,535 | $196.94 |
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 3,535 | -3,535 | — |
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 3,535 | +3,535 | $104.00 |
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 102,025 | +3,535 | $104.00 |
| Shavel Lee | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 98,490 | -3,535 | $196.94 |
| Shavel Lee | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 14,139 | -3,535 | — |
| Beckles Kathy Card | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 2,020 | -2,020 | $195.49 |
| Beckles Kathy Card | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 11,516 | -2,020 | $195.49 |
| Shavel Lee | Open Market Sale | 29.7.2026 | 2,500 | -2,500 | $220.00 |
| Shavel Lee | Open Market Sale | 29.7.2026 | 98,490 | -2,500 | $220.00 |
| Mann Elizabeth | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 400 | -400 | $192.11 |
| Mann Elizabeth | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 18,784 | -400 | $192.11 |
| Hendrick Gregory | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 146 | +146 | — |
| PERRY CHRISTOPHER JOHN | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 146 | +146 | — |
| Purtill Sabra R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 163 | +163 | — |
| Patiath Pradip | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 69 | +69 | — |
| LISS SAMUEL G | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 167 | +167 | — |
| LISS SAMUEL G | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 69,265 | +167 | — |
| Patiath Pradip | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,421 | +69 | — |
| Hendrick Gregory | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 4,737 | +146 | — |
| PERRY CHRISTOPHER JOHN | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 4,625 | +146 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,391,578 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,311,764 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 42.7% 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