The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved up 0.2% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it C, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading oversold. Over the past year the shares are down 26%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 12%. The street (10 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $147.
CDW Corporation CDW
Outside both standards
An entry written while the outcome is still unknown. It will be scored by what the market does next, and it will never be edited to look cleverer than it was.
In plain words · CDW Corporation provides information technology (IT) solutions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
read at $144.03
CDW Corporation holds its Markup at $144.03.
- PHPhase · the trend structure carries the Markup label
- INInsiders · no filings inside 60 days, left as found
- POPositioning · no disclosures inside 60 days, left as found
- OPOptions · no verdict drawn today, left as found
- SCScreen · does not pass the values gate
- edge confirmed
- edge broken
- edge forming
Each arm is one independent read. Conviction is not a single call, it is how many edges converge.
The investor read · the season, not the day
| Phase | Markup |
| Quantitative state | The statistical read favours the buyers, held for 13 days |
| Price | $144.03 |
| Valuation | 16.81 trailing · 12.23 forward price to earnings |
| Values screen | FAIL · score 10.0 |
| Beta | 0.96 |
The opportunity · what the numbers say it is worth
Our framework reads AVOID — it trades at roughly a 22% discount to our $175.00 fair value, weak competitive moat, 9.20% revenue growth.
Price history & projections · where it has been, where the models see it going
The valuation journey · where the price sits against fair value and the Street
Green marks levels above today's price, red below; the shaded band is the gap between the price and our fair value.
Reading the gap · Our model sees value the Street hasn't fully caught up to yet.
| Revenue growth | 9.20% |
| Profit margin | 4.70% |
| Debt to equity | 240.52 |
| Analyst consensus | Buy · 9 covering |
Fair value and rating are our own model estimates; target range reflects third-party analyst estimates. Analysis, not advice.
The values screen, explained · five checks, plain English
This company is excluded by both standards. There are two widely recognised ways to check whether a company is suitable for a Muslim investor. It fails on both:
Used by most halal investing apps ✗ DOES NOT PASS
The one Titan applies ✗ DOES NOT PASS
Why it fails. The problem is its debt ratio. Because both standards agree on this, it is a clear exclusion, not a borderline case.
What these two standards are, and how they differ →
- Business activity Its core business isn't built on prohibited lines — no gambling, alcohol, tobacco, weapons, or interest-based lending. Pass
- Debt load Interest-bearing debt is 36.1% of its assets, above the one-third ceiling the screen allows. Fail
- Interest-bearing cash Cash held in interest-bearing accounts and securities is 0.0% of assets, under the one-third limit. Pass
- Receivables Money owed to the company is 43.2% of assets, under the 49% limit. Pass
- Revenue purity Only 0.0% of revenue comes from non-compliant sources — under the 5% line. Pass
Every security is read against two recognised standards: our stricter asset-based screen (ratios measured against total assets) and the more widely used market-value standard (measured against market capitalisation). Where they agree we say so plainly; where they part ways — almost always on the debt check — we show both readings and mark it, because that disagreement is the finding, not a fault. We report the score; you and your scholar make the call.
The business, in plain words · what the numbers mean
IT middleman tripped up by its own borrowing
Picture a school district or mid-sized firm ordering servers and software licences. CDW sits in the middle, sourcing the kit and handling the paperwork. It moves at a steady nine per cent revenue growth, posts a forty-four per cent return on equity and trades on eleven times forward earnings, yet the business carries a balance sheet the ethical screen rejects outright.
We pass for that single reason. High debt levels breach our basic test, and a weak moat leaves little protection if hardware margins keep compressing or government budgets tighten. The thirty-one per cent gap to our fair value and the buy-rated analyst targets do not change the starting point.
Even strong returns can mask leverage that becomes painful in any slowdown. Analysis, not advice.
| Forward P/E | 12.2x priced for continued growth |
| Trailing P/E | 16.8x reasonably valued |
| Revenue growth | 9.2% steady growth |
| Profit margin | 4.7% barely profitable |
| Return on equity | 44.2% an exceptional return on shareholder capital |
| Debt to equity | 2.41 heavy leverage — higher risk if revenue softens |
| Current ratio | 1.17 adequate liquidity, worth monitoring |
| Beta | 0.96 steadier than the market |
| Market cap | $18.4B |
| Employees | 14,800 |
The risks · The things to watch: it carries a real debt load, which raises the stakes if revenue slips.
Plain-English interpretation of our own screen data. Analysis, not advice.
Related securities · others in CDW's space worth a look
Screened names in the same industry · explore each on its own page.
Where & how to trade · wherever in the world you are
CDW trades on a US exchange. As a US-listed security it is accessible through almost any international broker offering US markets. New to this, or investing from outside the US? Our guide to accessing global markets covers brokers, currencies and the practical steps.
The trader read · the latest dated commentary
The dated journal · newest first, never edited
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it C, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading oversold. Over the past year the shares are down 26%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 12%. The street (10 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $147.
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns.
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns.
Each entry above was written on its date, before the outcome. A journal you can prune is not a journal.
The insider ledger · Form 4 filings, as filed
| Date | Insider | Title | Type | Shares | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-18 | LEAHY CHRISTINE A | Chief Executive Officer | 4,830 | $499,398 | |
| 2026-05-11 | TAN HANG | Officer | 33,802 | · | |
| 2026-05-11 | LOCY PETER R | Officer | 1,950 | · | |
| 2026-04-01 | NELMS DAVID W | Director | 236 | · | |
| 2026-04-01 | SWEDISH JOSEPH R | Director | 236 | · | |
| 2026-03-10 | GRIER KELLY J. | Director | 13 | · | |
| 2026-03-10 | SANDERSON KATHERINE ELIZABETH | Officer | 104 | · | |
| 2026-03-10 | KUMAR MUKESH | Officer | 107 | · | |
| 2026-03-10 | NELMS DAVID W | Director | 163 | · | |
| 2026-03-10 | ZARCONE DONNA F | Director | 78 | · |
Public filings, recorded as found. The full tape lives at Insider Intelligence.
What holding actually paid · price plus dividends
| Period | Price then | Price return | Divs per share | $1,000 became | Total return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | $101.94 | +27.8% | $0.63 | $1,284 | +28.4% |
| 2 months | $124.79 | +4.4% | $0.63 | $1,049 | +4.9% |
| 3 months | $112.81 | +15.5% | $0.63 | $1,160 | +16.0% |
| 6 months | $148.23 | -12.1% | $1.26 | $887 | -11.3% |
| 1 year | $175.34 | -25.7% | $2.52 | $757 | -24.3% |
| 2 years | $216.82 | -39.9% | $5.01 | $624 | -37.6% |
| 3 years | $163.27 | -20.2% | $7.46 | $843 | -15.7% |
| 5 years | $157.91 | -17.5% | $11.63 | $899 | -10.1% |
Historical returns from market close data. Past performance does not guarantee future results.