Advance Auto Parts, Inc. (AAP)

The five reads

At a glance the decision-relevant reads, first

GLOBAL TAPE

Overseas lean-1.36%

FrankfurtAWN-2.58%⏱

London0H9G-2.86%⏱

MéxicoAAP*0.00%⏱

ZurichAWN0.00%⏱

Track record · free & ungated

We grade our price-band calls in public

Each forward price band is logged the day it's set and scored when it resolves — misses included. 5 bands have resolved so far — not yet enough for a hit-rate that would mean anything, so none is shown. This builds in the open, not behind the paywall.

bands logged

resolved so far

Building

status

The calibration ledger stays free, always — a track record can't sit behind a paywall.

Price action

Price & quote

Live quote refreshed every 15 minutes against the full daily snapshot.

The readUnder pressurefact

Where the price sits inside today's range and its 52-week range, plus how it's performed over time. This is the raw quote — the same number everywhere, just faster.

◆ Golden cross◇ Broadening range50-day sits above the 200-day — bullish long-term structure.

Drag or arrow-key the chart for daily OHLCV · 126 sessions through Aug 10, 2026 · prev close $57.80 (dashed)

Open●

$57.44

Prev close●

$57.80

Volume●

1.19M

avg 1.93M

Rel. volume◐

0.62×

below normal

Market cap●

$3.36B

Shares out●

60.30M

float 60.01M

Day range

$54.89$57.44

52-week range ◐

$37.89$65.21

-14.5% from high+47.1% above low

The QTick signal

QTick proprietary signal

A transparent point tally — bull evidence minus bear evidence — read over ~30 days. Faster factors time the swing; slower ones (quality, 13F, forensics) weigh in as longer-horizon context. A model-based prior, not advice.

~30-day swing read · graded vs S&Puncalibrated prior · track record buildingstrength is the tally magnitude, not a probability

Price-factor lean cohort-relative · momentum + low-vol

Price-factor lean — not shown at this market cap (these factors carry no validated edge above small-cap).

Where this is validated: survivorship-free factor study (micro/small caps only), |t|>3.2. Cohort-relative ranking, not a price forecast or buy/sell advice. Calibration tracked live.

net · balanced

2 bull / 2 bear factors

Factor breakdown 8 factors · signed points sum to net +1●

Analyst moves90d+1 pts

9 price-target raise(s) in 90d

Earnings4 quarters+3 pts

latest EPS beat by 76%

Insider flow120d—

Estimate revisionsWeeks—

Sentiment1–30d—

Longer-horizon context weighs the read · not a 30-day timing call

Institutional (13F)Latest 13F—

1 institutional holder(s) added/opened last quarter (demoted — validated negative IC, not scored (QUANT_SIGNAL.md))

Quality / valueTTM-2 pts

Altman-Z in the distress zone

Filing forensicsLatest FY—

filing forensics — possible channel-stuffing (receivables outrunning revenue) (demoted — settled NULL/wrong-signed, not scored (QTICK_FORMULA_AUDIT_2026_07.md))

Risk flagsDaily-1 pts

expensive valuation (bottom-quintile earnings yield)

Net tally

4 bull − 3 bear

Factors agreeing

2↑ 2↓

of 9 tracked

Read strength

balanced

30d horizon

Strongest factor

Earnings

+3 pts

Model

QTick Engine

AAP track record

Building

5 of 15 resolved

Forensic flags filing red flags · backtested edge where shown●

Revenue-timing languagerevenue-recognition timing language worth watching

Territory — competitor / supplier graph ●

ORLYCompetitor-1.4%

AZOCompetitor-1.9%

MGAPeer-0.7%

GPCPeer-0.8%

AURPeer-1.1%

Where the reads agree

Cross-category read

A decorrelated view across the categories already scored elsewhere on this page — where they agree, where they conflict, and how lopsided the split is. Not a new signal, a different angle on ones that already exist.

Category reads n=6 categories voting

Streetleans up

Eventleans up

Qualityleans down

Valueleans down

Trendleans down

Riskleans down n=5

2 lean up, 4 lean down — modal read: bear.

Where they conflict

Event leans up while Quality leans down.

Event leans up while Risk leans down.

Event leans up while Value leans down.

2 of 6 weighted reads lean the other way — minority weight share 37%.

Named patterns

Tape is deteriorating with risk flags lit.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Cheap, but low-quality and credit-stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Tape turning up while fundamentals/credit are still stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Crowded ownership and street love at a rich valuation.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Quality, positioning and the street agree.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

High quality, solvent and trending.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Trend, crowded short positioning and option fuel.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

Trend that is heavily rate/macro-driven.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal

↳ In detail

A pattern, not a validated signal

This regroups categories the page already scores elsewhere into one cross-category view — it does not add a new tally. Descriptive only — a decorrelated read of where the evidence agrees and conflicts, not a forecast and not advice. Patterns are condition lists, not outcome predictions, and are not yet validated to the proof bar.

+1 net

balanced

2 bull / 2 bear factors

Red-Flag X-Ray

Accounting quality · red-flag scan

One integrity score (0–100) from a set of accounting checks that look for red flags. Higher is safer — and we show the checks it passed, not just the ones it failed.

/ 100

Integrity score

1 critical · 3 watch · 1 clear of 5 scored tests

1 clear3 watch1 critical

Test battery ◐

✕✓!!!

5 forensic tests · 1 passed clean · 3 flagged for watch

✕Critical

Bankruptcy distressZ 1.78●

Altman-Z in the Distress

✓Clear

Earnings manipulationM -2.67●

Likely clean

!Watch

LeverageD/E 1.55●

debt-to-equity 1.55×

!Watch

Profitability qualityF 4/9●

Piotroski F-score 4 of 9

!Watch

Filing forensics1 flag(s)●

1 filing red flag(s) on the latest 10-K

How we test · 7 forensic testsA clear result ships as openly as a flag — and the tests that don't fire are published in full. No survivorship bias.

Share dilution / SBC creepFires when shares outstanding rise materially or stock-based comp outpaces buybacks.

Distress (Altman-Z, negative equity)Fires on balance-sheet fragility. For banks we substitute regulatory capital (CET1).

Margin trajectoryFires on multi-quarter gross / operating margin erosion.

Going-concern languageNLP scan of filings for material-doubt or going-concern wording.

Filing timelinessFires on late / NT (non-timely) filings and restatements.

Insider selling into strengthFires on discretionary insider sells during price strength; 10b5-1 plans down-weighted.

Analyst-downgrade momentumFires on clusters of net downgrades and target cuts.

Odds & pullback risk

Setup & odds

Which way the next move is more likely to go — and how overstretched the price looks right now.

The readSkews downsidewhere it sitsuncalibrated prior · not a forecast

How the likely upside compares with the downside, and how stretched the price is — odds, not timing.

Upside vs downside · 12m ◐

Upside 45%54.3% Downside

Skew favours downside · base rate 50/50

Historically, names tripping 2 validated red flags finished lower 12 months later in 54% of cases (n=4,204) — a survivor-biased floor, not a forecast. · n=4,204

Expected move · 1wk◐±—

Upside target◐$57.15 +2.5% · level, not a call

Invalidation / stop◐$54.60 -2.0% · level, not a call

Reward : risk◐1.3 : 1

BullClose above $57 opens continuation.

BaseChop between stop and target into the next catalyst.

BearA break of $55 invalidates the setup.

Pullback risk · experimental ◐

LowElevatedHigh

Historically, mid names in this tape state saw a ≥10% pullback within 63 trading days in 95% of cases (n=11,942).

1.20×the segment norm — 95% saw a ≥10% pullback within 63dn=11,942 · observational

Resolved up vs down · 63d◐54% up · 46% down same historical group as the pullback read · 11,942 cases · flat outcomes count on neither side — a historical rate, not a call

Conditioned on◐neutral · high vol · neg momentum the past setups matched against this one

1.20× the mid unconditional rate
price is at the modeled bottom zone (4/6 bottoming checks met) — risk word capped at In line
tape state: neutral

↳ In detail

How to read the odds

This is a historical rate, and an experimental one: across 25 years, stocks in the same state — same segment, same price phase, same volatility, same momentum — pulled back this often. The record is built from today's list of companies, so names that delisted along the way are missing and each stock's current segment is projected backward; the rates lean toward survivors until that rebuild lands. Compare the multiple against the segment rather than the bare percentage — recent years run higher than the full 25-year record. None of it predicts timing.

The structure under the price ●

Support band●$53.02 – $55.45 -0.5% from spot · level, not a call

pivot low●$55.08 basis

s1●$54.60 basis

pivot low●$54.29 basis

~68%of bands like this held 21 days after a touch — about the same as any comparable support level. Structure, not a prediction.n=40,800 · observational

Bottom confirmation●4 of 6 signs in find-bottom score 25/100 — pinned to 0 until the checklist clears

Capitulation flush, then quiet●in

Selling volume dried up●in

A higher low printed●in

Back above the 20-day line●not yet

Momentum diverging up●not yet

Heaviest volume on an up day●in

85%of confirmed bottoming reads still saw a ≥10% drawdown inside the next quarter (25-year study) — confirmation marks a turn forming, not safety.n=1,203 · observational

Trend & technical structure

Trend & technicals

The price chart's vital signs, in plain English. Expand any row for what it actually means for you.

The readUptrend intactwhere it sitsmoving-average posture · fact

Moving averages describe the direction; RSI and the bands describe how stretched the move is. Neither predicts the next one.

Average prices (the trend)

Price vs 200-day●+6.7%

Momentum, bands & levels

↳ In detail

The simple version

When price sits aboveits averages with momentum rising, the trend is healthy. When RSI is near the extremes or the price looks "stretched," the move is overdone and often takes a breather. Think of these as a weather report — conditions, not instructions.

Pattern outcomes · derived analysis

Do these patterns even work?

Derived · what patterns actually did

Every charting site detects the pattern. We publish what happened next — the forward win-rate and sample size at each horizon, including the famous patterns that historically meant nothing.

The readForward win-rates, with sample sizewhere it sits

How often each chart pattern was actually followed by a gain, and how many past cases that's based on — including famous ones that didn't work.

Each bar is the win-rate — how often the price was higher that many days after the pattern appeared. The line marks 50%, a coin flip: green beats it, red is worse than chance. Every bar is a platform-wide cohort base rateacross every stock that has shown this pattern (cohort record, not this ticker's own history alone).

Pattern10-day21-day63-day

DowntrendBelow a coin flip

forward win-rate46.9%n=1,231,607

forward win-rate47.2%n=577,208

forward win-rate47.4%n=182,081

slope -0.06 over 40 bars

Double topBarely beats chance

forward win-rate49.6%n=1,183,531

forward win-rate50.7%n=556,186

forward win-rate52.2%n=176,667

two peaks ≈ equal — reversal if neckline breaks

Snapshot as of 2026-08-11

↳ In detail

Why we show you the losers

Famous reversal signals like a bullish engulfing have historically closed higher less than half the time at short horizons — below a coin flip. We publish the win-rate and the sample size on every cohort, so a 42-case base rate never masquerades as an 8,500-case one. Objective base rates, not forecasts.

Momentum & performance

Momentum / performance

Trailing returns and relative strength versus the benchmark.

The readLaggardwhere it sitsRS percentile vs market

How the stock has returned, and whether it's beating the market. A strong run shows recent leadership — leadership reverses without warning.

Trailing returns

1-month◐+0.8%

3-month◐+7.5%

6-month◐+0.8%

Year-to-date◐+43.3%

1-year◐-5.7%

12-1 momentum◐+1.3%

Relative strength vs S&P 500

46.8

RS-rank
percentile vs market

laggingleading

Relative strength line (β-adj)◐-5.37

↳ In detail

What relative strength tells you

A rank of 46.8 means AAP has outpaced 46.8% of the market over the past year. That is what it has done, not a promise about what comes next — leadership can reverse without warning.

Risk profile

Risk

Volatility and sensitivity, regressed against SPY from adjusted bars — then the landmine check: what could actually go wrong here.

The readLow drawdown riskwhere it sitsvs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational

Beta is how much it moves with the market; volatility and the worst drop show how rough the ride has been. Historical context, not a position-size rule.

4.9%6-month large-drawdown risk vs 9.3% for its segment

Beta · 1-year◐

1.15

more sensitive than market

Beta · 3-year◐

0.99

Realized vol · 30d◐

52.7%

annualized

Max drawdown · 1y●

-39.3%

The drawdown read · 6-month, segment-graded

Where it sits0.5×

LowHigh

vs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational

4.9%6-month large-drawdown risk, vs 9.3% for its segment

Max drawdown, trailing year●-0.39 driver

Distance from 52-week high●-0.14 driver

Parkinson range volatility●0.48 driver

Log price (level)●4.02 driver

Observational 6-month large-drawdown risk ranking — not a forecast, not alpha. Historical distress rate for this ADV-Q5 mega segment: 9.3%. This name reads 0.5× that base rate.

Tape state & tail · nightly, adjusted bars

Neutral tape0/100

SettledKnifing

State: neutral — No dominant short-horizon pressure in the tape.

−13.1%a 1-in-200 day for this name — 1.4× what a normal curve expects

↳ In detail

Reading risk

A beta of 1.15 means that, historically, a 1% move in the S&P has come with a ~1.15% move here. Realized vol ran 53% and the largest drawdown observed in the trailing year was 39% — both are what happened, not a bound on what can. The drawdown band above is observational — a risk sort against names of the same segment, blind to balance-sheet failures that never showed in the price.

Failure modes

Coverage

Data not available — failure modes are routed per company type, and only the bank and crypto-treasury rulebooks are validated so far (this name routes as growth)

Macro sensitivity · derived analysis

How rates push this name

Derived · rates & regime

The 10-year yield is public. Its measured pull on this specific stock — and how it trades around the macro calendar — is the derived layer.

The readFalls with rateswhere it sitshow it moved when rates moved · extremes trimmed

How much this stock actually moves when interest rates move, and how it behaves around big economic releases.

Sensitivity to 10Y yield ●

Per +1% in the 10Y yield-95.6%

−120+12

Rates are a Falls with rates for this name

Observations●498 rolling window

Fit · r²●n/a

Measured across 498 daily moves against the 10-year Treasury yield (FRED DGS10). Where the company-level link is weak or the sample is short, we fall back to the sector average rather than print a number we don't trust.

Behaviour around the macro calendar ●

CPI · vs a typical dayn=00.0×

FOMC · vs a typical dayn=00.0×

NFP · vs a typical dayn=00.0×

PCE · vs a typical dayn=00.0×

× = how much more this stock moves on each release day vs a normal day. Amber = outsized (≥1.4×). Context, not a directional call.

Volatility regime ◔

The volatility engine runs on market-wide risk channels, not on individual names, so there is no 1-year volatility percentile for this symbol. The realized-volatility and drawdown reads in the risk section are the per-name measures.

Valuation

Is the stock cheap or expensive? Each multiple is graded and explained in plain English.

The readPriced in linewhere it sitsagainst its own 5-year range where we have it · standard bands otherwise

Price against earnings, sales, book value and cash flow. We mark the measures that don't apply rather than fake them.

What you pay for earnings

P/E (trailing)●Price ÷ last 12 months of profit; graded vs own 5y history when covered49.8×Rich

Forward P/E●Price ÷ next year's expected profit13.9×Cheap

PEG ratio◐Valuation set against expected growth — lower can look cheaper, but one cutoff is not a verdictn/an/a

Earnings yield◔Profit as a % of price, like a bond yield2.01%Rich

Earnings yield − risk-free●Earnings yield minus the government-bond yield at the same date-2.71%Spread

Dividend yield●Annual indicated cash dividend as a % of price1.79%Income

What you pay for the business

Price / Sales●Price ÷ annual revenue; graded vs own 5y history when covered0.4×Fair

Price / Book◔Price ÷ net assets on the books1.53×Cheap

EV / EBITDA◔Whole-company value ÷ operating cash earnings17.1×Fair

EV / FCF◔Whole-company value ÷ positive free cash flown/an/a

Price / FCF◔Price ÷ free cash flow generated-11.3×n.m.

FCF yield◔Free cash flow as a % of market value-8.86%n.m.

P/E vs own 5y●Five-year median 21.0×79th pctRich

P/S vs own 5y●Five-year median 0.4×63th pctFair

Peers today territory performance, for valuation context

ORLYCompetitor-1.4%

AZOCompetitor-1.9%

MGAPeer-0.7%

GPCPeer-0.8%

AURPeer-1.1%

Fundamentals & quality

Fundamentals / quality

How good is the underlying business? Scale, profitability and balance-sheet strength, graded.

The readReturns below capital costwhere it sitsreturn on capital vs its estimated cost of funding

Scale, profitability and balance sheet, with industrial return on capital compared directly with its estimated funding cost.

Scale & growth

Revenue · TTM◔Total sales over the last 12 months—Scale

EPS · TTM◔Profit earned per share—Profit

Net margin◔Cents of profit kept per $1 of sales0.5%Weak

Revenue growth◔Sales vs a year ago-5.4%Weak

EPS growth◔Profit-per-share vs a year ago—n/a

Margin trajectory◔Are profit margins widening or shrinking?n/an/a

Returns & balance sheet

ROE◔Profit generated on shareholders' equity2.0%Weak

ROIC●After-tax operating profit earned on the capital the business uses2.3%Weak

WACC●Estimated blended cost of debt and equity7.1%Hurdle

ROIC − WACC●Return on capital above or below its funding cost-4.8%Weak

Incremental ROIC · ~3y●What the last three years of new investment has actually earnedn/an/a

Gross / Op margin◔Profitability before & after operating costs43% / 2%OK

Free cash flow◔Cash left after running & investing$-298.00MWeak

Cash self-funding◔Self-funding on trailing free cash flow, or months of cash left at the current burnn/an/a

Debt / Equity◔Gross borrowings vs equity — negative book equity is not gradeable2.38Weak

Current ratio◔Can it cover near-term bills? Over 1.5 is healthy1.75Strong

Total assets · YoY◔Balance-sheet growth — a fact, not a signal · grew faster than 62% of the measured cross-section · as of 2026-08-09+9.5%Fact

Last filed 2026-08-11

Inventory ledger

The stockroom

Data not available.

Segments & geography

Where the revenue lives

Data not available.

Credit & safety · derived analysis

Distance from insolvency

Derived · distance from default

Not the debt total — how far this company's asset value could fall before its debts get hard to cover, and how that distance ranks against its peers.

The readWatchwhere it sitspercentile vs solvency universe

How far the company sits from real financial distress, plus how it ranks against peers — more than a debt total tells you.

99.89%12-month survival read

In 4,538 historical observations of names in this distance-to-default bucket (mid-cap), 5 went bankrupt or were delisted within 12 months — 0.11%.

measured against past bankruptcies and delistings · tested on later years (AUC 0.90) · a historical rate, not a credit rating

2.17

σ to default

0.11%model-implied probability of default ●

Filing-forensics flags

2/4

SafeGreyDistress

Model-implied, not a credit rating.It estimates how far the company's assets would have to fall before it couldn't cover its debts, using a standard model (Merton). Higher is safer. (risk-free rate n/a, one-year horizon, asset volatility from —)

Structural snapshot as of 2026-08-11

Distance-to-default band ●

distress · 0cautionsafe8σ+

Debt-service capacity

Interest coverage●n/a operating income / absolute interest expense

Long-term debt / assets●28.9% as filed; distinct from Merton D/V

↳ In detail

How to read these two ratios

The credit engine uses the same stored thresholds shown here: coverage at or below 1× cannot cover interest, while 8× or more is its comfortable band; long-term debt at 10% of assets or less is its light band, while 60% or more is its heavy band. Missing XBRL tags stay n/a.

Altman solvency ●

Altman Z-Score●1.8 Distress

↳ In detail

Why a percentile, not a number

The absolute Z-Score is shown whenever its filing inputs exist. The cross-sectional percentile is a separate field and stays n/a until a current universe rank is on file.

Forensic accounting ●

2Validated forensic-accounting flags fired. Individual flag details are not carried by this endpoint.

Dilution radar · derived analysis

Are your shares being diluted?

Derived · ownership erosion

Raw share count is everywhere. The consequence — how fast the count is growing and where that ranks against peers — is the read that matters.

The read—where it sitsdilution percentile vs peers

How fast the share count is changing versus peers, with stock compensation, issuance and repurchases shown separately when covered.

5-year share-count CAGR ●

The CAGR needs annual filings roughly five years apart that both carry a share count. This name's filing history on file does not span that window, so no rate is published — the buyback and stock-comp rows below are measured independently and still hold.

Most-dilutive percentile vs peers

LeastMedianMost

0percentile100

Peer percentile●50th below median

Stock comp / revenue◔0.4% latest fiscal year

Stock comp / OCF◔operating cash flow49.9% latest fiscal year

Gross buyback yield●+0.17% TTM repurchases / market value

Net buyback yield●+0.09% TTM repurchases minus issuance / market value

Diluted / basic share gap●1.2% latest fiscal-year per-share overhang proxy

SBC trend◔flat up to five fiscal years

Shares outstanding · indexed 5y ●

Indexing needs an unbroken run of annual share counts across the same five-year window the CAGR uses. Where a year is missing — or the reported counts switch share class mid-series — the chart is withheld rather than drawn across the gap.

Analyst & estimates

Consensus, price targets, forward estimates, and the company's recent results versus consensus.

The read—where it sitswhere Wall Street sits · not QTick

Targets matter less than which way estimates are heading and how often the company beats them.

Consensus rating ◔

Hold

38 analysts · score n/a/5

Strong buy 0%Buy 8%Hold 80%Sell 4%Strong sell 8%

12-month price target

low $35.00now $55.73high $70.00

Mean target◔$60.00 (+7.7%)

Forward estimates & revisions

Forward EPS consensus●—

Revision breadth · 30d●—

Revision momentum●Cut 5.3% · 30d

Beat-rate · 8q●—

The consensus EPS level, the share of analysts raising, and the realised beat-rate all come from the same estimate capture, which does not cover this name. The rating, target band and street moves above are from a separate source and are current.

EPS surprise history ●

No reported-vs-estimate pairs on file for this name

Recent rating changes ●

Street moves · last 90 days ◔

↓target $65Evercore ISI Groupfirm credibility 45/10004 Aug

↑target $58Mizuhofirm credibility 49/10026 May

↑target $60Wells Fargofirm credibility 45/10022 May

↑target $65RBC Capitalfirm credibility 44/10022 May

Earnings bias · derived analysis

How this name behaves into the print

Earnings habit

The street's consensus-surprise habit — whether estimates run conservative or aggressive against what the company reports, not management's own guidance — the beat streak graded against names with the same profile, and what the tape does on good news.

The readSerial beaterwhere it sitsvalidated base rates · graded out-of-time

Whether the street sandbags this name, how often a beat streak like this persists (with its sample size), and what the tape does with good news.

65%of names with this beat profile beat againn=41,405 · observational

Earnings in 1 days. This name beat the estimate and still fell in 46% of its last 24prints — a beat isn't a green light here.

Consensus habit · trailing 8 quarters

Consensus-surprise habit●not management guidancebeats most quarters, by thin margins n=8

Trailing beat rate●75% beat 5–6 of the last 8 · n=8

65%of names that beat 5–6 of the last 8 went on to beat again — 1.04× the segment average (cohort record since 2000, not this stock alone)n=41,405 · observational

survivor-tilted universe (currently-listed names; large-cap-skewed coverage)

What the tape does with it

46%of the time it beat the estimate but fell anywayn=24 · observational

13%of the time it missed the estimate but rose anywayn=24 · observational

Avg reaction on a beat●-1.7% n=2

Avg reaction on a miss●-8.8% n=3

undetermined — needs ≥4 measured beats

Earnings-day move · typical●— needs ≥8 measured prints

Implied vs realized move●— insufficient options history

↳ In detail

How to read the habit

This is a historical rate: among companies with the same recent beat record, that share beat again. It was checked on later periods than the ones it learned from, and against the plain long-run average. It describes the group, not this specific report.

Ownership & positioning

Ownership

Who holds it, how options lean, and the most recent insider, congressional and 13F transactions.

The readFunds addingwhere it sitspositioning band · not a vote

Who owns it and what insiders and big funds are doing. Steady buying reads positive; heavy selling reads cautious.

Holders

Institutional●127.4%

Insider●0.7%

Institutional flow●Funds adding

Fund concentration●—

Activist stake●None on file

Insider & short

Insider 90d net●—

10b5-1 vs discretionary◔scheduledMostly programmatic

Short interest · %float◔29.0%

Short interest · 30d Δ◔—

Options positioning

Put/call · OI●1.14

Put/call · volume●0.96

Implied move●next exp.±1.2%

IV skew (25Δ)●+1.3% put-skewed

↳ In detail

Reading the positioning

Institutions are still adding. A put/call of 1.14 and put-skewed IV — leaning defensive.

Recent transactions Form 4 + congressional●

FilerSourceActionValueDate

Johnson Richard ADirectorInsiderSell104128 Jul

Seboldt Thomas WDirectorInsiderSell147128 Jul

Seboldt Thomas WDirectorInsiderSell249228 Jul

Bailo Carla JeanDirectorInsiderSell363928 Jul

Ferraro John FrancisDirectorInsiderSell661928 Jul

13F filers · last quarter ●

Bridgewater Associates (Ray Dalio)Added+0.0M sh · $1M

All transactions · AAP

FilerSourceActionValueDate

Johnson Richard ADirectorInsiderSell104128 Jul

Seboldt Thomas WDirectorInsiderSell147128 Jul

Seboldt Thomas WDirectorInsiderSell249228 Jul

Bailo Carla JeanDirectorInsiderSell363928 Jul

Ferraro John FrancisDirectorInsiderSell661928 Jul

Hilson Joan MDirectorInsiderSell323528 Jul

Rep. Daniel GoldmanHouse · CongressSell$1,001 - $15,00012 Jul

Rep. Michael C. BurgessHouse · CongressSell$1,001 - $15,00024 Feb

Rep. Michael C. BurgessHouse · CongressBuy$15,001 - $50,00024 Feb

Rep. Nicholas Van TaylorHouse · CongressSell$1,001 - $15,00025 Mar

Rep. Nicholas Van TaylorHouse · CongressBuy$1,001 - $15,00018 Mar

Rep. Carlos CurbeloHouse · CongressBuy$1,001 - $15,00028 Aug

Form 4 (insiders) + congressional disclosures + 13F filings. Observational, not advice.

Institutional flow · derived analysis

Conviction weighting, not a transaction list

Derived · who's actually buying

Insider buys are weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several bought at once, alongside how fast big funds moved in or out quarter to quarter.

The readContinuing holders addingwhere it sitscontinuing holders only — excludes new and exited funds

Insider buys, weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several buy at once — plus how fast big funds are moving in or out.

How strong the insider buying is ●

Clustered exec buys · n/an/a / 18.44

018.44

Intensity index — explicitly not a probability

Distinct exec buyers

n/a

Buy clusters · last 90d

90d agotoday

Fund holders · quarter on quarter ●

+40new fundsexited−91

Net registered funds -51 this quarter

Continuing holders●Adding on balance funds that held through both quarters

↳ In detail

Reading the flow

No clustered executive buying this window. Among funds that held the name through both quarters, more added than trimmed. Separately, the registered-holder count moved -51 quarter-over-quarter (40 new, 91 exited). The two count different populations, so they can point opposite ways. Conviction is intensity, not a forecast.

Options microstructure

Computed over the stored full chain — where dealer hedging concentrates. Prices here are the chain snapshot's own, not the header quote.

The readHedging leans steadyingwhere it sitswhere options exposure sits

The busiest option strikes are where hedging is concentrated, which can slow or sharpen a move nearby. Context — not support and resistance.

Open-interest by strike · gamma walls ◐

Puts OI (k)Calls OI (k)

182

204

310WALL

185

112

182

102

310

WALL762

chain spot $57.74 max pain $56 (-3.0%)

Dealer regime & expected move

Gamma exposure (GEX)

Positive

long

Max pain●$56.00 (-3.0%)

Put/call · OI●1.14

Call wall◐$60.00 resistance

Put wall◐$53.00 support

Expected move · session◐±3.4%

Expected move · week◐±7.5%

Clustered ≈ $56Balanced bookLong gamma

↳ In detail

Reading the options chain

Calls and puts are roughly balanced (chain-wide P/C 1.14) — no strong directional tilt in the chain. Dealers are long gamma, so their hedging leans against moves — which tends to hold price near the $56 max-pain strike, currently 3.0% belowspot, into Friday's expiry. That damping works against range expansion while it lasts; it says nothing about which way price leaves. The chain is pricing about ±7.5% (≈ $4.32) over the coming week.

observational · not advice

Gamma map · derived analysis

Where dealer hedging concentrates

Derived · dealer hedging · marquee

Open interest is free everywhere. What it does — whether dealer hedging dampens or amplifies a 1% move, and the strikes where that hedging concentrates — is the derived read.

The readHedging may steady moveswhere it sitswhere dealer hedging sits

Whether dealer hedging leans toward steadying the price or sharpening the next move, and the strikes where that hedging is concentrated.

Support / resistance rails ◐

call wall · resistance$60

spot$57.74

put wall · support$50

Dealer regime ◐

Long gamma — hedging can steady moves

Net dealer gamma◐+$3.09M per 1% move

ATM implied vol◐0.5%

Expected move · 1d◐±3.4%

Expected move · 1w◐±7.5%

OTM IV skew (25Δ)◐+1.3% put-skewed

↳ In detail

Reading the gamma map

Dealers are long gamma, so they lean against moves — price gets pinned between support at $50.00 and resistance at $60.00 into expiry. Net gamma of +$3.09M is the dollar hedging effect per 1% move — the consequence a raw chain never tells you.

Peers & supply chain

Territory · peers & supply chain

The names in this stock's orbit — how each is trading today, and how they wire together as suppliers, customers and competitors.

The readLagging groupfact

How nearby companies are trading. Moving with them is a sector story; breaking away is specific to this stock.

TickerRelationshipTodayRelative move

AAPThis stock-3.58%

ORLYCompetitor-1.39%

AZOCompetitor-1.90%

MGAPeer-0.67%

GPCPeer-0.80%

AURPeer-1.13%

↳ In detail

Lagging its peers

AAP is -2.4% behind the peer average (-1.18%). Divergence from the group is where the stock-specific signal lives.

Supply map how the territory wires together●

competitor

Customer momentum

The customer chain

Data not available.

News & market context

The Story · news & social

Coverage published around the move, with the crowd's mood shown next to each.

The readCrowd mixedfactread as contrarian context

What moved the stock, plus how bullish the crowd is — which tends to be loudest right at the turning points.

Latest headlines 0▲ 0▼ of 48●

News

AAP fell −3.58% since the last close, amid recent coverage: “Advance Auto Parts (AAP) Restructuring Story Keeps Fair Value In Focus - simplywall.st” (simplywall.st).

Why it moved-3.58%·2026-08-11·source

Neutral

Advance Auto Parts (AAP) Restructuring Story Keeps Fair Value In Focus - simplywall.st

NEWSsimplywall.st·Mon

Neutral

Quantinno Capital Management LP Increases Stock Position in Advance Auto Parts, Inc. $AAP - MarketBeat

NEWSMarketBeat·Mon

Neutral

AAP260828C00070000 interactive stock chart | AAP Aug 2026 70.000 call stock - Yahoo Finance Singapore

NEWSYahoo Finance Singapore·Sun

Neutral

AAP260814P00062000 interactive stock chart | AAP Aug 2026 62.000 put stock - Yahoo Finance Singapore

NEWSYahoo Finance Singapore·Sun

Headline tone ◐

50/100 · 7-day

flat

Polarity of the headlines themselves, scored 0-100 with 50 neutral — a read on the coverage, not on the crowd.

Social sentiment ◐

No Reddit or StockTwits posts on file for this name in the last 7 days.

What this name did from here

Time machine

Each look-back point: the price then, the move to today, and what was going on — earnings, corporate events, news flow.

The readLower than a year agofact

The price at each look-back point and the move to today, with what was happening at the time — the per-ticker face of the track record.

Look-backs · vs the $55.73 close of 2026-08-10

3 months ago●$56.15 -0.8% to today

6 months ago●$56.60 -1.5% to today

1 year ago●$59.08 -5.7% to today

3 years ago●$71.53 -22.1% to today

history starts 2023-06-01

↳ In detail

Why we show the rear-view mirror

Every number on this page gets graded by what happens next. The time machine is the same idea pointed backwards: the state of this name at each past date and the move that followed, for any symbol — not a curated highlight reel.

Risk case · derived analysis

The risk case

The case against

What can break: how hard this name has fallen before, a sensible position cap, whether it behaves like a lottery ticket, how much cash it has left, how it drifts after earnings, whether the dividend holds, and what changed in the filings — plus a crowding read when its three inputs agree.

The readCoverage incompletewhere it sitsan experimental model estimate · the history-based reads below are graded separately

The case against the stock: how hard it has fallen before, how much cash it has left, how it behaves after earnings, whether the dividend holds, what changed in the filings, and how crowded the trade is.

Avoid score · v2.1 isotonic model · experimental

The nightly batch has not scored this name yet — the model needs universe-wide ranking features that are not computed on demand.

Terminal fate · the cohort's ledger

Of 2811 mid names tracked 2016-2026, 0.4% were delisted for cause within 24 months and 8.0% were acquired — historical frequencies for the cohort, not a forecast for this name.

Cohort●mid 2016-2026

12m outcomes●for-cause 0.1% [0.1%–0.2%] acquired 4.2% [3.9%–4.6%] · still listed 95.4% · n=2918

24m outcomes●for-cause 0.4% [0.2%–0.5%] acquired 8.0% [7.2%–8.8%] · still listed 91.1% · n=2811

36m outcomes●for-cause 0.8% [0.6%–1.1%] acquired 11.6% [10.5%–12.7%] · still listed 86.7% · n=2694

↳ In detail

Reading the fate ledger

Each row is what happened to every tracked name in this size cohort over that window — delisted for cause, acquired, or still listed — with the band around each rate. These are the cohort's historical frequencies, not probabilities for this name, and the acquisition arm is never an acquisition forecast.

Deep-drawdown recovery record

56.3%of mid names 30% or more below their prior high reclaimed it within 3 years, counting the delisted as never-recovered — an upper bound, since still-open episodes are excludedn=3,519 · observational

Names this size that fell 30% took a median 245 trading days to reclaim their prior high — and only 56.3% did within 3 years once the delisted are counted (a survivor-only screen would claim 65.7%).

This name's drawdown●-35.5% crossed the −30% bucket · vs the trailing 3y high

Survivor-only view●65.7% the illusion gap is 9.4% — what dropping the delisted flatters the odds by

Median recovery●245 trading days among the names that did recover

Max defensible position size

2.2%max defensible size 2.2% - tail bindsn=92,785 · observational

Segment●mid routing cohort

Vol tercile●mid realized vol bucket

Momentum sign●neg trailing return direction

Half-Kelly●27.2% Kelly criterion / 2

Tail cap●2.2% VaR / CVaR limit

Cat cap●54.6% catastrophe-rate limit

Binding constraint●tail

Lottery profile

No lottery signal — trailing-21d max daily return is within the normal range for its cohort (mid).

Cash runway · burn-rate graded

Cash runway●41.9q quarters at current burn rate

About 41.9 quarters of cash at current burn - names in this bucket: 16.3% catastrophe rate within a year.

16.3%catastrophe rate within 12m for burners with >8q runwayn=62,863 · observational

Median 12m forward●-1.1% median outcome for this runway bucket — not mean

Cash on hand●$3.12B latest reported

Annual FCF●$-298.00M trailing 12-month free cash flow

Post-earnings drift · reaction vs sigma

Move already priced●z>4 after jumps this large, measured drift edge is zero

Move already priced: after jumps this large, measured drift edge is zero.

Latest earnings reaction●-15.1% 2022-11-15

Daily sigma (21d)●3.32% baseline volatility used for z-score

Reaction size●z>4 first-day move ÷ its normal daily move

Strength of evidence●-0.06 Newey–West t — how consistent the pattern is, not how many cases

↳ In detail

How post-earnings drift works

After an earnings reaction, how far price keeps drifting over the next 63 trading days depends on how big the first move was. A jump more than four times the stock's normal daily move usually spends the effect — the market has already repriced it. Milder reactions historically kept drifting, by about 3.2 percentage points in our sample.

Dividend reliability · evidence incomplete

Dividend yield●1.61% profile value · percentage points

FCF coverage●<1x free cash flow vs dividend

The calibration stores historical within-period yield-tercile cells but not the mapping for today's yield, so no cut or suspension probability is published.

Filing restatements · trailing 2 years

Restatements on file●1 latest: 2024-10-05

Filings here were later materially revised. Historically, flagged quarters restated at 34.0% vs 5.5% unflagged (6.2x).

34.0%restatement rate for flagged quarters — reference sample count not stored

Unflagged rate●5.5% baseline for quarters without restatements

Relative rate●6.2× flagged vs unflagged quarters

↳ In detail

What a restatement means here

A restatement means a filing was later materially revised — not necessarily fraud, but a signal the original numbers were unreliable. Historically, quarters flagged here were restated at 34.0% vs 5.5% — 6.2× the unflagged rate.

Calibration scorecard

Auditable track record

Every rating we publish is fingerprinted, tracked, and resolved in public. Here's how we've actually done.

calls logged
track record builds as calls resolve (5/8)

Resolved●

resolved, below the publication threshold

Open calls●

tracked, unresolved

AAP track record●

building

published once resolved

Advance Auto Parts, Inc. ·

Price action

The QTick signal

Where the reads agree

Red-Flag X-Ray

Odds & pullback risk

Trend & technical structure

Do these patterns even work?

Momentum & performance

Risk profile

Failure modes

How rates push this name

Valuation

Fundamentals & quality

Inventory ledger

Segments & geography

Distance from insolvency

Are your shares being diluted?

Analyst & estimates

How this name behaves into the print

Ownership & positioning

Conviction weighting, not a transaction list

Options microstructure

Where dealer hedging concentrates

Peers & supply chain

Customer momentum

News & market context

What this name did from here

The risk case

Calibration scorecard