Value
6.8/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| P/E | 7.2 |
| P/S | 6.3 |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.8 |
| Fwd P/E | 7.7 |
| PEG | 5.0 |
| Analyst target | 9.0 |
- ▸Forward P/E: 15.9x
- ▸PEG: 1.53
OLED · Why this verdict
Why Universal Display (OLED) 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 score5.0/10
ConfidenceMEDIUM
MacroNEUTRAL
Thesis pillars
| Pillar | Expectation | Trend |
|---|---|---|
Three customers — BOE, LG Display, and Samsung Display (SDC) — together account for the majority of Universal Display's revenue, and the single supplier concentration with PPG creates a dual-sided supply chain fragility that leaves revenue and material costs exposed to bilateral negotiation leverage. Bear case | Revenue from the top 3 customers decreases to represent less than 70% of total sales within 12 months as additional panel manufacturers adopt OLED technology. | →Stable |
| CounterLarge panel manufacturers adopting OLED technology tend to be sticky customers given the process integration required, and having the leading global manufacturers as customers validates the technology's competitive position. | ||
Revenue has declined 14% year-over-year, and earnings beat count is split 2 beats and 2 misses over the last 4 quarters, indicating that the top-line pressure from slower OLED panel demand is creating real execution uncertainty for the company. Growth breakdown | Revenue growth returns to positive territory (above 0% year-over-year) within 2 reported quarters as OLED display adoption expands into IT and automotive applications. | →Stable |
| CounterA temporary pause in panel manufacturer capex spending can create a demand trough that reverses sharply, and the earnings quality warning (61% FCF to net income) may partly reflect conservative accounting rather than a structural problem. | ||
Universal Display achieves net margins of 34% and ranks highest among electronic component peers on both margins and quality scores, reflecting the value of its phosphorescent OLED materials and technology licensing business where intellectual property commands premium pricing. Quality breakdown | Net margin stays above 28% over the next 4 reported quarters, confirming the durable nature of the licensing-driven margin structure. | →Stable |
| CounterA Rule of 40 score of only 6 and declining revenue of 14% indicate that margin strength is not being accompanied by growth, and if panel makers reduce OLED display production, material volumes will fall and margins could compress quickly. | ||
Analysts project 38% upside with a target of approximately $111, and the technical setup shows recovering MACD and rising on-balance volume even though the stock is below its 200-day moving average, suggesting a potential recovery setup if demand from panel makers rebounds. Sentiment breakdown | Stock price rises above $100 within 12 months as analyst targets are progressively achieved through a panel demand recovery cycle. | →Stable |
| CounterThe 52-week position score near the low end of the range and a death cross pattern currently in place suggest that the price has been declining for an extended period, and analyst targets may be lagging reality rather than leading it. | ||
Three customers — BOE, LG Display, and Samsung Display (SDC) — together account for the majority of Universal Display's revenue, and the single supplier concentration with PPG creates a dual-sided supply chain fragility that leaves revenue and material costs exposed to bilateral negotiation leverage.
→StableBear case
- Expectation
- Revenue from the top 3 customers decreases to represent less than 70% of total sales within 12 months as additional panel manufacturers adopt OLED technology.
CounterLarge panel manufacturers adopting OLED technology tend to be sticky customers given the process integration required, and having the leading global manufacturers as customers validates the technology's competitive position.
Revenue has declined 14% year-over-year, and earnings beat count is split 2 beats and 2 misses over the last 4 quarters, indicating that the top-line pressure from slower OLED panel demand is creating real execution uncertainty for the company.
→StableGrowth breakdown
- Expectation
- Revenue growth returns to positive territory (above 0% year-over-year) within 2 reported quarters as OLED display adoption expands into IT and automotive applications.
CounterA temporary pause in panel manufacturer capex spending can create a demand trough that reverses sharply, and the earnings quality warning (61% FCF to net income) may partly reflect conservative accounting rather than a structural problem.
Universal Display achieves net margins of 34% and ranks highest among electronic component peers on both margins and quality scores, reflecting the value of its phosphorescent OLED materials and technology licensing business where intellectual property commands premium pricing.
→StableQuality breakdown
- Expectation
- Net margin stays above 28% over the next 4 reported quarters, confirming the durable nature of the licensing-driven margin structure.
CounterA Rule of 40 score of only 6 and declining revenue of 14% indicate that margin strength is not being accompanied by growth, and if panel makers reduce OLED display production, material volumes will fall and margins could compress quickly.
Analysts project 38% upside with a target of approximately $111, and the technical setup shows recovering MACD and rising on-balance volume even though the stock is below its 200-day moving average, suggesting a potential recovery setup if demand from panel makers rebounds.
→StableSentiment breakdown
- Expectation
- Stock price rises above $100 within 12 months as analyst targets are progressively achieved through a panel demand recovery cycle.
CounterThe 52-week position score near the low end of the range and a death cross pattern currently in place suggest that the price has been declining for an extended period, and analyst targets may be lagging reality rather than leading it.
TrendMatrix Research · core thesis
Engine thesis — one sentence
Universal Display Corporation generates strong margins of 34% and ranks best-in-class among peers, with analysts projecting 38% upside from current levels, but revenue is declining 14% year-over-year and the company faces high concentration among three customers — BOE, LG Display, and SDC — limiting pricing power.
Falsifiable statement — pillar-level invalidators below. Engine-derived; not personalized advice.
Per-dimension breakdown
Quality
6.5/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| ROE | 4.2 |
| ROA | 4.9 |
| Gross margin | 10.0 |
| Op margin | 10.0 |
| Net margin | 10.0 |
| Current ratio | 5.0 |
| FCF quality | 4.7 |
| Moat | 5.1 |
| Rule of 40 | 3.0 |
| Piotroski F | 7.8 |
- ▸Strong margins: 34%
- ▸Earnings quality warning: 61% FCF/NI
- ▸No competitive moat
- ▸Rule of 40: 6 (fail)
Growth
2.0/10data confidence 67%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Rev growth | 0.0 |
| EPS growth | 4.1 |
- ▸Declining revenue: -14%
Momentum
1.9/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| RSI | 3.5 |
| MACD | 0.0 |
| OBV | 1.0 |
| MA position | 1.0 |
| Volume | 3.9 |
- ▸Volume distribution (falling OBV)
- ▸Below 200-MA, MA slope -6.2%/30d — confirmed downtrend
Sentiment
6.6/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| Analyst rating | 5.0 |
| Price target | 9.8 |
| erm sentiment | 5.0 |
- ▸Analyst upside: 62%
Insider
6.5/10data confidence 75%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| materiality | 6.5 |
| insider conviction | 8.0 |
| holder change | 5.1 |
- ▸Modest insider buying — $1,465,644 (0.040% of mkt cap)
Peer rank
4.8/10data confidence 80%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| value rank | 6.0 |
| quality rank | 7.4 |
| growth rank | 0.0 |
- ▸Attractive P/E vs peers
- ▸Best-in-class margins
Technical
6.4/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| bollinger | 10.0 |
| support resistance | 9.1 |
| 52w position | 0.0 |
Risk (lower is worse)
4.4/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| short interest | 5.1 |
| days to cover | 3.8 |
| volatility | 0.0 |
| put call | 10.0 |
| implied vol | 2.5 |
| beta | 4.9 |
| debt equity | 4.4 |
- ▸High IV: 65%
- ▸Concentration risks: 2 HIGH (10-K Item 1A — sized via position_sizing, validated via buy_confidence)
Catalyst
4.0/10data confidence 100%| Component | Sub-score |
|---|---|
| erm | 5.0 |
| earnings history | 3.3 |
| earnings timing | 5.0 |
| surprise avg | 0.0 |
| dividend safety | 6.5 |
- ▸Earnings concerns: 2B/2M
- ▸Dividend: 254.0%
How the verdict was assembled
Engine trigger
Multiple concerning factors. Consider reducing position.
Engine technical detail
verdict_path:
L4:PATH_F_SELLPassed (7)
- ASYMMETRY:3.9>=1.5
- INSIDER:OK
- 8K:CLEAN
- NEWS_EVENTS:NONE_RECENT
- EARNINGS_PROXIMITY:27d clear
- SEMI_CYCLE_PEAK:CLEAR
- MATERIALS_CYCLE_PEAK:CLEAR
Failed (2)
- MOMENTUM:1.9<4.5
- DEATH_CROSS:HARD_BLOCK
Warning (0)
none
Reward-to-Risk
3.85
Upside
+41.0%
Downside
10.7%
Sizing output
AVOID
SetupFalling Knife — Death cross, below all MAs, RSI 35, MACD bearish
EdgeNo clear edge — No clear edge identified
SuitabilitySpeculative — Drawdown -51% (>40% off 52w high)
Investment implication
The F-path SELL output reflects an overall score of 4.5 below the 5.6 soft trigger — multiple weakening dimensions accumulated rather than a single hard-floor breach. The strongest dimension ( Value at 6.8) was not enough to lift the adjusted overall above the threshold. Co-occurring failed gates ( MOMENTUM:1.9<4.5, DEATH_CROSS:HARD_BLOCK) reinforce the read. Current asymmetry R:R is 3.85 — supplementary context, not the trigger for this path.
The strongest dimensions are Value at 6.8, Sentiment at 6.6, and Quality at 6.5; the weakest are Momentum at 1.9, Growth at 2.0, and Catalyst at 4.0. The V9 engine flagged 2 failed gates, producing an asymmetric reward-to-risk of 3.85 and an engine sizing output of AVOID.
What would invalidate the thesis
Falsifying conditions — when triggered, the corresponding pillar's thesis is invalidated.
- P1Best In Class Margins
Trip ifNet margin falls below 20% for 2 consecutive quarters, signaling the high-margin licensing model is under structural pressure.
- P2Customer Concentration Risk
Trip ifAny single customer represents more than 50% of revenue in a disclosed period, indicating concentration risk has intensified rather than diversified.
- P3Revenue Decline Headwind
Trip ifRevenue declines more than 20% year-over-year for 2 consecutive quarters, indicating the demand trough is deeper than a cyclical correction.
- P4Analyst Upside Recovery Thesis
Trip ifAnalyst consensus price target falls below $85, reducing projected upside to less than 10% from current levels.