The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Price has moved down 6.4% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it B. Technically it is momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are up 14%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 27%. The street (19 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $60.
Advance Auto Parts, Inc. AAP
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.
read at $53.16
Advance Auto Parts, Inc. holds its Markup at $53.16.
- 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 | Consolidating, no directional conviction, held for 232 days |
| Price | $53.16 |
| Valuation | 47.46 trailing · 13.26 forward price to earnings |
| Values screen | FAIL |
| Beta | 1.05 |
The opportunity · what the numbers say it is worth
Our framework reads AVOID — it trades at roughly a 32% discount to our $70.00 fair value, weak competitive moat, 1.20% 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 · Both our model and the analysts see meaningful upside from here.
| Revenue growth | 1.20% |
| Profit margin | 0.51% |
| Debt to equity | 255.31 |
| Analyst consensus | Hold · 19 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 185.4% of its assets, above the one-third ceiling the screen allows. Fail
- Interest-bearing cash Interest-bearing cash and securities are 102.3% of assets, above the one-third limit. Fail
- Receivables Money owed to the company is 0.0% 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
Car parts chain buried by debt and weak returns
Walk into any Advance Auto Parts store and the shelves look stocked, yet behind the counter the business is barely turning a profit. Revenue edges up just 1 percent while net margins sit at 1 percent and return on equity is a paltry 3 percent. The forward multiple of 13.3 times earnings looks tempting for a cyclical name, but the weak moat and tiny growth tell us this is not a bargain, it is a trap. We pass.
The company also fails our ethical screen on its debt ratio, adding another clear reason to stay away. Nineteen analysts sit on a hold rating with a median target of 61 dollars, well short of any real recovery story. Low returns, thin margins and a consumer cyclical label point to earnings that could fall quickly when car owners delay repairs.
Risk sits in the combination of high leverage, minimal profitability and exposure to discretionary spending that can vanish in a slowdown. The 32 percent gap to our fair value number does not change the picture when the underlying business shows no sign of improvement. Analysis, not advice.
| Forward P/E | 13.3x expensive even after accounting for its growth |
| Trailing P/E | 47.5x expensive — the price assumes strong growth ahead |
| Revenue growth | 1.2% slow but positive growth |
| Profit margin | 0.5% barely profitable |
| Return on equity | 3.1% a modest return on shareholder capital |
| Debt to equity | 2.55 heavy leverage — higher risk if revenue softens |
| Current ratio | 1.78 healthy short-term liquidity |
| Beta | 1.05 moves a little more than the market |
| Market cap | $3.2B |
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 AAP'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
AAP trades on the NYSE. 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 markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. 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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it B. Technically it is momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are up 14%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 27%. The street (19 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $60.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. 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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it B. Technically it is momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are up 14%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 27%. The street (19 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $60.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. 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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-24 | LEE EUGENE I JR | Director | 346 | $20,132 | |
| 2026-04-24 | WINDOM BRENT | Director | 27 | $1,610 | |
| 2026-04-24 | SEBOLDT THOMAS W. | Director | 24 | $1,465 | |
| 2026-04-24 | SEBOLDT THOMAS W. | Director | 28 | $1,661 | |
| 2026-04-24 | BAILO CARLA JEAN | Director | 48 | $2,825 | |
| 2026-04-24 | FERRARO JOHN FRANCIS | Director | 99 | $5,792 | |
| 2026-04-24 | HILSON JOAN M | Director | 41 | $2,422 | |
| 2026-04-24 | SMITH GREGORY L | Director | 27 | $1,610 | |
| 2026-02-17 | OKELLY SHANE M | Chief Executive Officer | 61,685 | $3,500,007 | |
| 2026-02-17 | GRIMSLAND RYAN P. | Chief Financial Officer | 16,744 | $950,055 |
Public filings, recorded as found. The full tape lives at Insider Intelligence.
The political ledger · congressional disclosures
| Date | Politician | Party | Type | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Feb2025 | Tim Walberg | Republican | buy | 15K–50K |
| 5 Jun2026 | Gil Cisneros | Democrat | buy | 1K–15K |
| 16 Jun2026 | Matt Van Epps | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
| 15 May2026 | David Taylor | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
| 15 May2026 | David Taylor | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
What holding actually paid · price plus dividends
| Period | Price then | Price return | Divs per share | $1,000 became | Total return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | $51.83 | +14.7% | · | $1,147 | +14.7% |
| 2 months | $54.59 | +8.9% | · | $1,089 | +8.9% |
| 3 months | $52.43 | +13.4% | $0.25 | $1,138 | +13.8% |
| 6 months | $47.79 | +24.4% | $0.50 | $1,254 | +25.4% |
| 1 year | $52.22 | +13.8% | $1.00 | $1,157 | +15.7% |
| 2 years | $60.49 | -1.8% | $2.00 | $1,015 | +1.5% |
| 3 years | $59.92 | -0.8% | $3.00 | $1,042 | +4.2% |
| 5 years | $176.66 | -66.4% | $13.50 | $413 | -58.7% |
Historical returns from market close data. Past performance does not guarantee future results.