Value
6.4/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| P/E | 2.1 |
| P/S | 9.8 |
| EV/EBITDA | 3.7 |
| Fwd P/E | 7.6 |
| PEG | 10.0 |
| Analyst target | 4.0 |
- ▸Forward P/E: 16.1x
- ▸PEG: 0.06
ARCB · Why this verdict
Why ArcBest (ARCB) is rated SELL
Updated
Model-generated analysis — not investment advice. Not a registered investment advisor. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Show full disclosure ▾Hide full disclosure ▴
About TrendMatrix. TrendMatrix is a publisher of general securities research and market commentary. We publish on a regular schedule. All content is the same for every subscriber in a tier — we do not provide personalized investment advice and we do not take into account any individual subscriber's financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance, tax situation, or holdings.
Not investment advice. TrendMatrix is not a registered investment adviser. Our content is for informational and educational purposes only. Consult your own licensed investment adviser, broker, or tax professional before making any investment decision.
Conflicts and positions. The TrendMatrix editorial team frequently holds personal long-term positions in securities discussed. We disclose positions held at the time of publication on each piece. We maintain a trading-window policy: we do not initiate or close positions in the same direction as a TrendMatrix publication within 24 hours before or 72 hours after publication.
No paid promotion. TrendMatrix does not accept payment from any issuer, broker, or third party in exchange for coverage of any security. Our sole compensation is subscription revenue.
No fiduciary duty. No fiduciary, advisory, or agency relationship is created between you and TrendMatrix by reading our content or subscribing to our service.
Performance. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance figures reflect the published model only and do not reflect any individual subscriber's actual results.
VerdictSELL
Overall score5.2/10
ConfidenceMEDIUM
MacroNEUTRAL
Thesis pillars
| Pillar | Expectation | Trend |
|---|---|---|
Overall business quality sits below the minimum acceptable threshold, and the competitive analysis indicates no durable moat — meaning the company lacks the pricing power or structural advantage needed to sustain margins through a freight cycle downturn. Quality breakdown | Over 12 months, operating and net margins should improve enough to lift the quality score above the 4.0 minimum floor, and competitive differentiation should become evident in pricing or market share data. | →Stable |
| CounterA Piotroski F-Score of 7 out of 9 reflects solid balance-sheet and cash-flow mechanics; the absence of a scored moat does not preclude operational improvements that could narrow the quality gap even without a structural competitive advantage. | ||
Free cash flow conversion is exceptional at 197% of net income — meaning the company generates nearly twice as much cash as its reported earnings suggest — providing a real financial cushion that the weak quality score and margin metrics do not fully capture. Quality breakdown | Free cash flow should remain above 100% of net income for at least two consecutive quarters, confirming that cash generation is structurally robust and not a one-period anomaly. | →Stable |
| CounterFree cash flow can run ahead of net income temporarily due to working capital timing or deferred capex; a freight cycle turning adverse could quickly reverse cash generation and expose the margin weakness the income statement already shows. | ||
The stock currently trades above its resistance target, with roughly 5.5% remaining headroom to the take-profit level and a reward-to-risk ratio below 1.0x — the geometric setup is unfavorable and does not compensate for the downside risk of approximately 7% to the stop level. Warnings | A favorable entry would require a pullback that widens the upside-to-downside ratio above 1.5-to-1; a catalyst that pushes the stock through the resistance target cleanly would also alter the setup. | →Stable |
| CounterA recent analyst mention in the news may reflect a formal upgrade with a higher price target; if analyst coverage raises the target meaningfully, the risk/reward geometry could improve without requiring a price pullback. | ||
The last four quarters show an alternating beat/miss/beat/miss pattern with an average surprise of essentially flat — the company is not demonstrating consistent earnings outperformance, and implied volatility at 95% reflects the market's uncertainty about near-term delivery. Catalyst breakdown | Two consecutive beats with surprises greater than 5% over the next 12 months would signal that earnings execution has improved and the alternating pattern has been broken. | →Stable |
| CounterThe most recent quarter was a beat, and the overbought RSI reading alongside above-average momentum suggests the market may already be pricing in improved near-term execution, with the miss history potentially in the rearview mirror. | ||
Overall business quality sits below the minimum acceptable threshold, and the competitive analysis indicates no durable moat — meaning the company lacks the pricing power or structural advantage needed to sustain margins through a freight cycle downturn.
→StableQuality breakdown
- Expectation
- Over 12 months, operating and net margins should improve enough to lift the quality score above the 4.0 minimum floor, and competitive differentiation should become evident in pricing or market share data.
CounterA Piotroski F-Score of 7 out of 9 reflects solid balance-sheet and cash-flow mechanics; the absence of a scored moat does not preclude operational improvements that could narrow the quality gap even without a structural competitive advantage.
Free cash flow conversion is exceptional at 197% of net income — meaning the company generates nearly twice as much cash as its reported earnings suggest — providing a real financial cushion that the weak quality score and margin metrics do not fully capture.
→StableQuality breakdown
- Expectation
- Free cash flow should remain above 100% of net income for at least two consecutive quarters, confirming that cash generation is structurally robust and not a one-period anomaly.
CounterFree cash flow can run ahead of net income temporarily due to working capital timing or deferred capex; a freight cycle turning adverse could quickly reverse cash generation and expose the margin weakness the income statement already shows.
The stock currently trades above its resistance target, with roughly 5.5% remaining headroom to the take-profit level and a reward-to-risk ratio below 1.0x — the geometric setup is unfavorable and does not compensate for the downside risk of approximately 7% to the stop level.
→StableWarnings
- Expectation
- A favorable entry would require a pullback that widens the upside-to-downside ratio above 1.5-to-1; a catalyst that pushes the stock through the resistance target cleanly would also alter the setup.
CounterA recent analyst mention in the news may reflect a formal upgrade with a higher price target; if analyst coverage raises the target meaningfully, the risk/reward geometry could improve without requiring a price pullback.
The last four quarters show an alternating beat/miss/beat/miss pattern with an average surprise of essentially flat — the company is not demonstrating consistent earnings outperformance, and implied volatility at 95% reflects the market's uncertainty about near-term delivery.
→StableCatalyst breakdown
- Expectation
- Two consecutive beats with surprises greater than 5% over the next 12 months would signal that earnings execution has improved and the alternating pattern has been broken.
CounterThe most recent quarter was a beat, and the overbought RSI reading alongside above-average momentum suggests the market may already be pricing in improved near-term execution, with the miss history potentially in the rearview mirror.
TrendMatrix Research · core thesis
Engine thesis — one sentence
The trucking operator converts cash exceptionally well — free cash flow at 197% of net income — but the absence of a competitive moat, quality sitting below the minimum acceptable floor, and a price that has already exceeded the resistance target with negative reward/risk make the current setup unattractive for new positioning.
Falsifiable statement — pillar-level invalidators below. Engine-derived; not personalized advice.
Per-dimension breakdown
Quality
3.3/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| ROE | 1.4 |
| ROA | 1.4 |
| Gross margin | 0.0 |
| Op margin | 0.1 |
| Net margin | 0.7 |
| Current ratio | 3.7 |
| FCF quality | 10.0 |
| Moat | 4.5 |
| Piotroski F | 7.8 |
- ▸Excellent cash conversion: 197% FCF/NI
- ▸No competitive moat
- ▸Strong Piotroski F-Score: 7/9
Growth
6.7/10data confidence 67%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Rev growth | 3.3 |
| EPS growth | 10.0 |
Momentum
3.6/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| RSI | 8.9 |
| MACD | 0.0 |
| OBV | 1.0 |
| MA position | 6.0 |
| Volume | 1.9 |
- ▸Oversold in uptrend (RSI 16)
- ▸Volume distribution (falling OBV)
- ▸Above 200-day MA
Sentiment
6.4/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Analyst rating | 7.0 |
| Price target | 6.8 |
| erm sentiment | 5.0 |
Insider
5.0/10data confidence 50%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| materiality | 5.0 |
| holder change | 5.1 |
- ▸No net insider activity — $0 (0.000% of mkt cap)
Peer rank
4.7/10data confidence 80%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| value rank | 6.9 |
| quality rank | 5.0 |
| growth rank | 6.7 |
Technical
7.7/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| bollinger | 7.9 |
| support resistance | 9.4 |
| 52w position | 5.8 |
Risk (lower is worse)
4.5/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| short interest | 6.0 |
| days to cover | 7.2 |
| volatility | 0.5 |
| put call | 3.1 |
| implied vol | 1.5 |
| beta | 4.8 |
| debt equity | 8.6 |
- ▸Elevated put/call: 1.53
- ▸High IV: 71%
Catalyst
4.1/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| erm | 5.0 |
| earnings history | 3.3 |
| earnings timing | 5.0 |
| surprise avg | 2.1 |
| dividend safety | 5.2 |
- ▸Earnings concerns: 2B/2M
- ▸Dividend: 34.0%
How the verdict was assembled
Engine trigger
Quality below minimum threshold.
Engine technical detail
verdict_path:
L1:HARD_BLOCKPassed (5)
- INSIDER:OK
- NEWS_EVENTS:NONE_RECENT
- EARNINGS_PROXIMITY:25d clear
- SEMI_CYCLE_PEAK:CLEAR
- MATERIALS_CYCLE_PEAK:CLEAR
Failed (2)
- MOMENTUM:3.6<4.5
- ASYMMETRY:-0.2=NEGATIVE
Warning (1)
- 8K_FLAG:1.02
Reward-to-Risk
-0.18
Upside
-1.8%
Downside
9.6%
Sizing output
AVOID
Setup— — No clear chart pattern; technical signals are mixed
EdgeNo clear edge — No clear edge identified
SuitabilityAggressive — Beta 1.57>1.3, MCap $3.1B<$5B
Investment implication
The L1 gate blocked the positive-verdict path: a hard-floor threshold was breached, so dimensional pillars — including Technical at 7.7 could not lift the engine output above the verdict floor. Failed gate signal: MOMENTUM:3.6<4.5.
The strongest dimensions are Technical at 7.7, Growth at 6.7, and Value at 6.4; the weakest are Quality at 3.3, Momentum at 3.6, and Catalyst at 4.1. The V9 engine flagged 2 failed gates with 1 warning, producing an asymmetric reward-to-risk of -0.18 and an engine sizing output of AVOID.
What would invalidate the thesis
Falsifying conditions — when triggered, the corresponding pillar's thesis is invalidated.
- P1Quality Below Floor No Moat
Trip ifQuality score rises above 5.0 on the 10-point scale for 2 consecutive reporting periods.
- P2Exceptional Cash Conversion
Trip ifFree cash flow as a percentage of net income falls below 80% for 2 consecutive quarters.
- P3Unfavorable Risk Reward At Price
Trip ifReward-to-risk ratio rises above 1.5x based on an updated take-profit level exceeding $185.
- P4Mixed Earnings Delivery
Trip ifEPS surprise exceeds 5% for 2 consecutive quarters, breaking the alternating pattern.