Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$44.17
▲ $1.21 (+2.8%)
Market data updated: 10/01 12:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 10/01/2026
News analyzed: 10/01/2026
Market Cap
$1.22B
Day Range
$43.59 - $44.81
52-Week Range
$31.88 - $55.91
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$40.54
Resistance
$52.05
XPEL is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+34.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/28 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 53.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
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
54
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
73
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
19
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
70
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 XPEL, Inc. highlights its strong financial performance and strategic growth initiatives. The company reported record Q2 2026 revenue of $143.1 million—up 14.7% year-over-year—and net income of $18.04 million, alongside positive Q3 guidance. Analysts praised its low-debt, high-return profile (23% EPS growth, 17.9% ROE) and expansion plans, including manufacturing investments. Additionally, XPEL partnered with Tint World® on a historic preservation project and renewed its automotive career program, *Unique Academy USA*, with Will Castro. A board change was noted, but the focus remains on transformational growth and investor confidence.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about XPEL, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 15 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
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
19
Fundamentals
70
Technical
19
Valuation
50
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-10%
Market Narrative
51
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
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 — 89/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 19/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies for XPEL split sharply between bullish and cautious camps, with some investors seeing strong technical or structural tailwinds while others flagged fundamental or valuation concerns. Samuel Armstrong Nelson, Walter Bagehot, and Charles Mackay all scored high (89, 85, and 80 respectively), suggesting favorable cycle positioning, resilience in liquidity, and the absence of speculative mania—indicating a relatively clean, opportunistic case. Conversely, the Grahamite approaches (scoring 31–32) dismissed the stock as either too risky or not cheap enough, while Peter Lynch (26) and Jesse Livermore (19) outright rejected it for lacking growth justification or aligning with the prevailing trend. The middle ground—represented by Howard Marks (62), Philip Fisher (53), and Morgan Housel (53)—acknowledged the stock’s merits but tempered enthusiasm with warnings about stretched expectations or moderate risk, highlighting a divide between those who prioritize relative strength and those who demand deeper valuation or qualitative edge.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 89
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)
🟢 85
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 80
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 60
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 59
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 53
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 53
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 39
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 32
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 26
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)
🔴 19
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 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 8 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$40.54
Range Bottom
$52.05
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
42.2%
Operating Margin
13.2%
Net Margin
10.8%
EBITDA Margin
13.2%
ROE
18.3%
ROA
13.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.85
Cash
$50.86M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.25
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$44.17
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$46.12
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+4.4%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
13.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.9% | $71.67M | $65.75M |
| 2 | 11.0% | $79.59M | $66.99M |
| 3 | 8.2% | $86.11M | $66.49M |
| 4 | 5.3% | $90.71M | $64.26M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $92.98M | $60.43M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$62.93M
Terminal Value
$1.47B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$952.95M
Enterprise Value
$1.28B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$1.28B
*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
$10.12
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$6.19
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 15 positive, 4 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 19.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 17.8.2026
Yahoo · 12.8.2026
Motley Fool · 12.8.2026
Yahoo · 8.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 8.8.2026
Benzinga · 6.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
MarketBeat · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
Moby · 5.8.2026
MT Newswires · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
Business Wire · 5.8.2026
ChartMill · 5.8.2026
XPEL, Inc. (XPEL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
XPEL currently scores 54/100 (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, XPEL's estimated fair value is $46.12, which is 4.4% above the current price of $44.17. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
XPEL's technical score is 19/100, 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: 53.1%; Current ratio: 3.25; Gross margin: 42.2% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.25 (3y annualized return -17.1% / max drawdown 68.1%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for XPEL.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North John F | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 1,324 | -441 | — |
| North John F | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 10,716 | +441 | — |
| BOGART STACY L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 1,324 | -441 | — |
| BOGART STACY L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 8,907 | +441 | — |
| North John F | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 441 | +441 | — |
| BOGART STACY L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 441 | +441 | — |
| North John F | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 441 | -441 | — |
| BOGART STACY L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.9.2026 | 441 | -441 | — |
| Thornton Mark Andrew | Other Transaction | 30.7.2026 | 1,765 | -1,765 | — |
| Thornton Mark Andrew | Other Transaction | 30.7.2026 | 0 | -1,765 | — |
| Wood Barry | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 637 | -637 | — |
| Pape Ryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 737 | -737 | $45.45 |
| Wood Barry | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 235 | -235 | $45.45 |
| Pape Ryan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 1,990 | +1,990 | — |
| Pape Ryan | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 3,026 | +3,026 | — |
| Wood Barry | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 156 | -156 | $45.45 |
| Pape Ryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 485 | -485 | $45.45 |
| Pape Ryan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 1,990 | -1,990 | — |
| Wood Barry | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 968 | +968 | — |
| Wood Barry | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 637 | +637 | — |
| Pape Ryan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 1,085,766 | +1,990 | — |
| Pape Ryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 1,085,281 | -485 | $45.45 |
| Pape Ryan | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 1,088,307 | +3,026 | — |
| Pape Ryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.6.2026 | 1,087,570 | -737 | $45.45 |
| Pape Ryan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.6.2026 | 1,991 | -1,990 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,555,804 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 2,585,676 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.0% 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