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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
Sherwin-Williams SHW
Clears the common standard
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 · The Sherwin-Williams Company engages in the development, manufacture, distribution, and sale of paint, coatings, and related products to professional, industrial, commercial and retail customers.
read at $317.51
Sherwin-Williams holds its Markup at $317.51.
- 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 | Elevated stress, defensive posture warranted, held for 3 days |
| Price | $317.51 |
| Valuation | 30.53 trailing · 23.87 forward price to earnings |
| Values screen | FAIL · score 10.0 |
| Beta | 1.10 |
The opportunity · what the numbers say it is worth
Our framework reads AVOID — it trades above our $246.19 fair value estimate, moderate competitive moat, 6.80% 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 more conservative model reads it as fully-to-richly valued here, while the Street is more bullish — a quality-at-a-fair-price name rather than a deep-value one.
| Revenue growth | 6.80% |
| Profit margin | 10.86% |
| Debt to equity | 329.52 |
| Analyst consensus | Buy · 20 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
It depends which standard you follow. There are two widely recognised ways to check whether a company is suitable for a Muslim investor, and on this company they disagree. Here is how it did on each:
Used by most halal investing apps ✓ PASSES
The one Titan applies ✗ DOES NOT PASS
Why the two disagree. They fall out over one thing only: the company’s debt. Our stricter standard measures that debt against what the company owns, and it works out too high to pass. The common standard measures the same debt against what the company is worth on the stock market, where it works out low enough to pass. Every other check, the two agree on. So in practice, most halal apps would treat this as fine to hold, while our stricter view would not — and which line you follow is between you and your scholar.
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 50.0% of its assets, above the one-third ceiling the screen allows. Against market value it is 18.6%, under the 30% line the market-value standard uses — so that standard clears it. Divergent
- 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 11.6% 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
Paint leader fails on debt and valuation stretch
Every time a homeowner repaints a room the tins move, yet Sherwin-Williams shares sit at 331 dollars against a 246 dollar fair value. Forward earnings trade at 24.9 times while revenue rises just 7 percent and margins sit at 11 percent. The ethical screen already rules it out on the debt ratio, so we pass regardless of the 61 percent ROE or moderate moat.
This is a cyclical business where housing swings drive volumes. A high multiple on peak-cycle earnings is not a bargain, it is the classic warning sign that multiples compress when volumes turn.
Debt adds real fragility when rates stay high and construction slows. Twenty analysts may still lean buy, but the gap to fair value and the ethical fail leave no room for comfort.
Analysis, not advice.
| Forward P/E | 23.9x expensive even after accounting for its growth |
| Trailing P/E | 30.5x a premium valuation |
| Revenue growth | 6.8% slow but positive growth |
| Profit margin | 10.9% thin but positive margins |
| Return on equity | 60.7% an exceptional return on shareholder capital |
| Debt to equity | 3.30 heavy leverage — higher risk if revenue softens |
| Current ratio | 0.86 below 1 — short-term bills exceed liquid assets |
| Beta | 1.10 moves a little more than the market |
| Market cap | $78.3B |
| Employees | 64,249 |
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.
Latest news · what the market is reading on SHW
- › LOW Paid Holders $47 Bil While The Stock Went Nowhere Trefis · 20d ago
- › 1 Large-Cap Stock to Consider Right Now and 2 We Avoid StockStory · 20d ago
- › How Lowe's Stock Is Compounding Value Without The Sales Boom Trefis · 21d ago
- › Nippon Paint Makes $8.6 Billion Bid for AkzoNobel’s Decorative-Paints Unit The Wall Street Journal · 21d ago
- › NVIDIA Was the Darling Of The AI Boom, Now It’s Cheaper Than The King Of House Paint 24/7 Wall St. · 25d ago
Headlines from third-party outlets, linked for reference — not our reporting, not advice.
Related securities · others in SHW'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
SHW 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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved up 8.5% 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 D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
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 modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 15%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (20 analysts) rates it buy, with a mean price target of $381. It reported earnings in this window, a natural checkpoint for the thesis.
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 modest positive 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 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-06 | ANDERSON KERRII B | Director | 31 | $10,001 | |
| 2026-04-06 | GAMGORT ROBERT JAMES | Director | 106 | $33,749 | |
| 2026-04-06 | WILLIAMS THOMAS L II | Director | 106 | $33,749 | |
| 2026-04-06 | THAMAN MICHAEL H | Director | 106 | $33,749 | |
| 2026-02-24 | YOUNG BRYAN J | Officer | 2,513 | $915,913 | |
| 2026-02-17 | ANDERSON KERRII B | Director | 558 | · | |
| 2026-02-17 | PETZ HEIDI G | Chief Executive Officer | 16,800 | · | |
| 2026-02-17 | BINNS JUSTIN T | Officer | 9,900 | · | |
| 2026-02-17 | YOUNG BRYAN J | Officer | 3,900 | · | |
| 2026-02-17 | REA TODD D | Officer | 5,100 | · |
Public filings, recorded as found. The full tape lives at Insider Intelligence.
The political ledger · congressional disclosures
| Date | Politician | Party | Type | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 May2026 | Ro Khanna | Democrat | buy | 1K–15K |
| 2026-04-13 | Ro Khanna | Democrat | Sale | 15K–50K |
| 15 May2026 | Ro Khanna | Democrat | buy | 1K–15K |
| 1 May2026 | Ro Khanna | Democrat | 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 | $311.89 | -2.6% | $0.80 | $977 | -2.3% |
| 2 months | $335.24 | -9.4% | $0.80 | $909 | -9.1% |
| 3 months | $316.88 | -4.1% | $0.80 | $961 | -3.9% |
| 6 months | $327.72 | -7.3% | $1.60 | $932 | -6.8% |
| 1 year | $357.39 | -15.0% | $3.18 | $859 | -14.1% |
| 2 years | $288.02 | +5.5% | $6.19 | $1,076 | +7.6% |
| 3 years | $234.46 | +29.6% | $8.83 | $1,334 | +33.4% |
| 5 years | $264.59 | +14.8% | $13.54 | $1,200 | +20.0% |
Historical returns from market close data. Past performance does not guarantee future results.