Value
4.6/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| P/E | 2.7 |
| P/S | 10.0 |
| EV/EBITDA | 0.6 |
| Fwd P/E | 1.0 |
| PEG | 10.0 |
| Analyst target | 3.0 |
- ▸Forward P/E: 80.1x
- ▸PEG: 0.33
Updated
Model-generated analysis — not investment advice. Not a registered investment advisor. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
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.
| Pillar | Expectation | Trend |
|---|---|---|
The engine flags an earnings quality red flag, with free cash flow running at -14% of net income, no competitive moat, and broader quality concerns that keep the quality score at just 1.6, far below the 4.0 floor. Quality breakdown | The FCF-to-net-income ratio should turn positive and quality score should climb above 3.0 over the next 12 months if fundamentals are stabilizing. | →Stable |
| CounterA negative FCF/NI ratio in a single period can reflect timing of working-capital swings or one-time capital expenditures rather than a persistent earnings-quality problem. | ||
The engine flags 2 of 5 value-trap signals -- operating margin has compressed to 2.6% and insiders made 5 sells worth 0.04% of market cap -- suggesting the cheap-looking valuation may be a trap rather than a bargain. Bear case | Operating margin should recover above 5% over the next 4 quarters to disprove the value-trap read. | →Stable |
| CounterRestaurant chains routinely see temporary margin compression from input-cost inflation or remodel capex that reverses once the cycle turns, without reflecting a structural value trap. | ||
The engine's risk/reward asymmetry ratio sits deeply negative at -2.38, with the analyst target already reached and 35.8% below the original upside case, meaning downside risk now dominates the setup. Engine gate (failed) | The asymmetry ratio should turn positive (above 0) over the next few months if the setup improves. | →Stable |
| CounterA negative asymmetry reading right after a strong technical breakout can just reflect near-term target exhaustion rather than a durable reversal, since price already cleared its prior resistance. | ||
Short interest sits elevated at 45% of float, a level the engine flags as a key risk even as the stock holds a technical breakout above its 200-day moving average. Key risks | Short interest should decline below 30% over the next 2 quarters if bearish conviction is fading. | →Stable |
| CounterVery high short interest can also set up a short squeeze that pushes the stock sharply higher if any positive catalyst emerges, which would look bullish rather than risky. | ||
CounterA negative FCF/NI ratio in a single period can reflect timing of working-capital swings or one-time capital expenditures rather than a persistent earnings-quality problem.
CounterRestaurant chains routinely see temporary margin compression from input-cost inflation or remodel capex that reverses once the cycle turns, without reflecting a structural value trap.
CounterA negative asymmetry reading right after a strong technical breakout can just reflect near-term target exhaustion rather than a durable reversal, since price already cleared its prior resistance.
CounterVery high short interest can also set up a short squeeze that pushes the stock sharply higher if any positive catalyst emerges, which would look bullish rather than risky.
Cracker Barrel shows a technical breakout but the engine's own quality, value-trap, and risk/reward signals all point to caution -- an earnings-quality red flag, margin compression, negative asymmetry, and elevated short interest outweigh the cheap headline valuation.
Falsifiable statement — pillar-level invalidators below. Engine-derived; not personalized advice.
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| P/E | 2.7 |
| P/S | 10.0 |
| EV/EBITDA | 0.6 |
| Fwd P/E | 1.0 |
| PEG | 10.0 |
| Analyst target | 3.0 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| ROE | 1.9 |
| ROA | 0.0 |
| Gross margin | 2.3 |
| Op margin | 0.3 |
| Net margin | 0.4 |
| Current ratio | 2.0 |
| FCF quality | 0.0 |
| Moat | 3.1 |
| Piotroski F | 4.4 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Rev growth | 1.8 |
| EPS growth | 10.0 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| RSI | 5.0 |
| MACD | 3.0 |
| OBV | 4.1 |
| MA position | 8.0 |
| Volume | 0.0 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Analyst rating | 5.0 |
| Price target | 2.1 |
| erm sentiment | 6.1 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| materiality | 5.0 |
| holder change | 5.1 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| value rank | 5.6 |
| quality rank | 1.9 |
| growth rank | 0.6 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| bollinger | 3.5 |
| support resistance | 2.0 |
| 52w position | 4.4 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| short interest | 0.0 |
| days to cover | 7.2 |
| volatility | 0.0 |
| put call | 0.0 |
| implied vol | 2.3 |
| max pain risk | 3.0 |
| beta | 6.2 |
| debt equity | 2.5 |
| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| erm | 6.5 |
| earnings history | 3.3 |
| earnings timing | 5.0 |
| surprise avg | 10.0 |
| dividend safety | 3.5 |
Quality below minimum threshold.
L1:HARD_BLOCKSetup— — No clear chart pattern; technical signals are mixed
EdgeNo clear edge — No clear edge identified
SuitabilityAggressive — MCap $1.2B<$5B
The L1 gate blocked the positive-verdict path: a hard-floor threshold was breached, so dimensional pillars — including Growth at 5.9 could not lift the engine output above the verdict floor. Failed gate signal: MOMENTUM:4.0<4.5.
The strongest dimensions are Growth at 5.9, Catalyst at 5.7, and Insider at 5.0; the weakest are Quality at 1.6, Risk (lower is worse) at 2.6, and Technical at 3.3. The V9 engine flagged 2 failed gates with 1 warning, producing an asymmetric reward-to-risk of -2.14 and an engine sizing output of AVOID.
Falsifying conditions — when triggered, the corresponding pillar's thesis is invalidated.
Trip ifQuality score rises above 4.0.
Trip ifOperating margin stays below 3% for 2 more consecutive quarters.
Trip ifAsymmetry ratio stays below -1.0 for 2 more consecutive months.
Trip ifShort interest exceeds 50% of float.