21 July 2026 Screener (new candidates)
New candidates clearing the bar today
Autodesk (ADSK) — $215.01
Off high: -33 to -34% (52-week high $329.09) Case: Genuine valuation dislocation — EV/Sales compressed to ~7.5x versus a 5-year average of ~10.2x (-26%), a sharp break from several years of stable multiples rather than a steady de-rating. Fundamentals are solid: FCF trending up (lumpy due to a billing-model transition, but $2.41B in the most recent fiscal year), Altman Z-Score 4.10, Piotroski 8/9. Moat rests on deep AutoCAD/Revit file-format and workflow lock-in among licensed engineers and architects. Catalyst: MaintainX acquisition expanding the operations & maintenance TAM; +16% YoY revenue growth with margin expansion in the most recent quarter. Confirming signal: A genuine, multi-person open-market insider-buying cluster — CEO Anagnost, CFO Moorjani, and two directors all bought shares in May–June 2026 at prices from $189 to $231. This is the strongest insider-conviction signal found across today’s entire screen. Counter-case: Some quarter-over-quarter growth deceleration versus peers has been flagged by analysts. No legal or political overhang of note. Status: First appearance in the tracking log — a fresh lead, not yet confirmed by a second run.
Veeva Systems (VEEV) — $194.56
Off high: -36 to -38% (52-week high $310.50) Case: The cleanest balance sheet of any name screened this run — debt-free, net cash, Altman Z-Score 12.8. FCF has grown every year for five straight years ($750M to $1.39B). Valuation shows a genuine dislocation: EV/Sales ~10.0x versus a 5-year average of ~13.6x (-26%), a sharp recent drop after several stable years rather than a slow de-rating. Moat: Vault CRM is the de facto industry standard in life-sciences customer relationship management, with high switching costs and a quasi-network effect from industry-wide standardization. Catalyst: A multi-year Vault CRM legacy-migration cycle is underway; the Falcon MLR AI product launched in June 2026; the most recent quarter beat estimates and the stock reacted positively. Counter-case: Life-sciences CRM market saturation is a real, open question — this is a large but not infinite addressable market, and growth eventually has to come from expansion within existing accounts rather than new-logo growth. Status: First appearance — a fresh lead.
ServiceNow (NOW) — $98.60
Off high: -53% (52-week high $210.20) Case: A real dislocation, not just a big drawdown — EV/Sales sits at ~11.9x versus a 5-year average of ~16.1x (-26%), and the multiple history is non-monotonic (it hasn’t been a slow, steady de-rating). Fundamentals are strong: revenue +21% YoY, FCF of $4.59B, net cash, Altman Z-Score 6.4. Catalyst: Current remaining performance obligations (cRPO) grew +22.5% YoY, and the 2026 AI-product (Now Assist) bookings target was raised from $1B to $1.5B — a direct, quantified rebuttal to the “AI disrupts SaaS” bear thesis that’s been weighing on the stock. Counter-case: Even after the drawdown, the stock isn’t statistically cheap in absolute terms — still roughly 12x EV/Sales and 35x EV/FCF. The market is already pricing in continued strong execution; the risk is multiple compression if growth merely meets rather than beats expectations, not a business-quality problem. Status: Second appearance in the tracking log with fresh supporting evidence each time — the strongest repetition signal of the three names above.
Notable names that did not clear the bar (for context)
Microsoft (MSFT) — genuine valuation dislocation and durable moat, but no insider-buying signal to offset a modest, still-unresolved securities suit tied to Copilot-adoption disclosures. Close, but short.
Boston Scientific (BSX) and Zoetis (ZTS) — both show real valuation discounts, but each has a franchise-specific demand deceleration (electrophysiology growth cooling for BSX, Librela/Solensia safety-warning fallout for ZTS) that hasn’t yet stabilized.
Huntington Ingalls (HII) — strong moat (near-sole U.S. nuclear-carrier shipyard) but weaker balance-sheet quality than headline backlog numbers suggest (Altman Z-Score in the grey zone, one recent year of thin free cash flow).
Insulet (PODD) — real growth and a strong moat in tubeless insulin delivery, but two confirmed device-safety corrections within the past year on a life-critical product is a genuine, not cosmetic, quality flag.
Disney (DIS), Accenture (ACN), Ciena (CIEN) — all show real valuation discounts but each has a specific, unresolved near-term risk (earnings tracking below guidance for DIS; a genuine bookings deceleration for ACN; a valuation that’s still rich even after a momentum-driven pullback for CIEN).
Chipotle (CMG), Salesforce (CRM), Adobe (ADBE) — all cleared a mandatory valuation-discount check this run (Adobe’s discount is the deepest of the three, roughly two-thirds below its own 5-year average multiples) but haven’t yet had full fundamental diligence completed — flagged for follow-up.
Methodology: Screening the S&P 500, Nasdaq-100, and a curated non-US large-cap watchlist (market cap ≥$10B, all sectors) for durable, cash-generative businesses trading at a genuine discount — either ≥40% off their 52-week/all-time high, or trading meaningfully below their own 5-year average valuation multiples. Candidates that clear the quantitative bar then go through a quality/moat/catalyst screen, a political and insider-trading overlay (via QuiverQuant), and an explicit value-trap check: is this cheap because the market is temporarily wrong, or because the business is genuinely impaired?
Macro backdrop: Fed funds unchanged at 3.50–3.75%; new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh has shifted communications toward pure data-dependence. June CPI came in at 3.5% YoY headline / 2.6% core — still above target. Markets are pricing a ~90% probability of a hold at the July 28–29 FOMC meeting. Net: a neutral-to-cautious macro backdrop, not a tailwind or headwind driving today’s conclusions.
Universe result: 41 large/mega-cap names are currently trading ≥40% off their highs, spanning software, healthcare, industrials, media, and semis. Most fail the quality or value-trap tests on closer inspection — the discipline here is to reject far more names than it accepts.
This is a research and screening output, not a trade recommendation. Conviction scores reflect a systematic framework (valuation discount, business quality, catalyst evidence, insider activity, and legal/political risk), not a guarantee of future returns. Please do your own due diligence before acting on any of the above.