Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
CVNA

CVNA Research brief

Carvana

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$68.29(−0.03%)

Sagehood’s view on CVNA

Carvana · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

47Neutral50 is balancedScore unchanged since 2026-10-29 at 47; view unchanged at Neutral. Compare the two recordsConfidence 50 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

Dated research brief

WhyCVNA looks neutral because 50.3% revenue growth dwarfs the sector median while the 8.7% operating margin only matches it. The unresolved risk is a rising 69.0% volatility with a −28.6% drawdown.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the neutral view is the 50.3% revenue growth, far above the 5.0% sector median. If the 8.7% operating margin proves durable, the bull case at $116.2 implies 70% upside from the $68.29 close.
Break conditionFrom the financial specialist: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth-led claim.Tests that specialist’s reading, not this page’s whole Neutral view.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

Close vs. model fair value · discounted cash flow

Bear
$6.50
Base
$25.10
Bull
$116.20

Base case −63% vs. the 2026-10-30 close, on fundamentals to 2026-09-30. Peer-implied median $73.31 from 2 peer-median multiples. Estimates from this research’s valuation model, not a price target.

The bear case sits more than 5× from the close: an extreme scenario, shown as the model computed it.

The market price implies more growth or higher margins than this model assumes, so its base case sits far below the close. The valuation specialist weighs that gap; it is not a forecast that the price will fall.

Against peers

Consumer Discretionary
MultipleCVNAGroup medianPercentile
P/E (TTM)not reported on a comparable basis18.96×not placed
P/S0.97×1.45×22nd
P/B6.13×4.01×62nd
FCF yield4.17%3.08%78th
Score details & research limitations9 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

Where the break condition comes from: Sagehood research took this condition from the financial specialist. It tests that specialist’s own reading, so it does not say everything that would change this page’s Neutral view.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$68.29 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day−0.03%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage8 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 2 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 8 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run47 on 2026-10-29 → 47 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Filing cited in the evidenceNot recorded on this card. The newest filing on record is under Key financials, and recent filings are listed under SEC filings.
Peer set9 names in Consumer Discretionary: AMZN, CCL, CMG, F, NCLH, NKE, SBUX, TSCO, TSLA. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range shows the peer-implied median from 2 peer-median multiples.

Not in this run: Company profile date and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

9 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $68.29

+3.2% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

CVNA adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. CVNA adjusted close. Continuous series. $68.29 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-07-23 to 2026-10-30 · 32 publications

Each point is a verified published score. The line breaks where the research method changed (4 methods, numbered in the order they were first used), so scores are not joined across methods. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3047Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2947Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2838Bearish62Method 4
2026-10-1640Bearish50Method 4
2026-10-0942Bearish55Method 4
2026-10-0742Bearish55Method 4
2026-10-0240Bearish60Method 4
2026-10-0145Neutral50Method 4
2026-09-3040Bearish52Method 4
2026-09-2940Bearish52Method 4
2026-09-2839Bearish52Method 4
2026-09-2542Bearish48Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective43Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-2342Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-1844Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective40Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective44Bearish58Method 4
2026-09-0438Bearish50Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective40Bearish60Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective45Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-2848Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective49Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective42Bearish60Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective42Bearish60Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective42Bearish60Method 3
2026-08-1451Neutral63Method 2
2026-08-1353Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0744Bearish60Method 1
2026-08-0642Bearish60Method 1
2026-08-0442Bearish60Method 1
2026-07-3140Bearish79Method 1
2026-07-2340Bearish44Method 1

Specialists

8 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

2 unavailable

CVNA research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Bearish

Carvana grows at 50.3% trailing-twelve-month revenue growth, far above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, but its 8.7% operating margin only matches the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue was $27,451 million with revenue growth of 50.3% against the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 8.7% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Why it matters now

Revenue growth far above the sector revenue-growth median with operating margin merely at the sector operating-margin median implies scale is not yet producing a profitability edge, though the reason is unobserved.

What could change the view

Countercase: If the next filing shows revenue growth decelerating further while operating margin falls below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median, the growth-led read would be wrong. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth-led claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
30
Evidence confidence
70
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
9.10
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.18
Weighted contribution
5.50
Business driver
Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $27,451 million with revenue growth of 50.3% against the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 8.7% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.
Mechanism
Revenue growth far above the sector revenue-growth median with operating margin merely at the sector operating-margin median implies scale is not yet producing a profitability edge, though the reason is unobserved.
Countercase
If the next filing shows revenue growth decelerating further while operating margin falls below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median, the growth-led read would be wrong.
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Bearish

Score
30
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.18
Weighted contribution
5.50

Risk specialist

Bearish

Score
32
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
2.84

Sector specialist

Neutral

Score
52
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
5.76

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.03
Weighted contribution
1.66

News specialist

Neutral

Score
64
Evidence confidence
58
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
8.23

Price-trend specialist

Neutral

Score
48
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.22
Weighted contribution
10.64

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
45
Weight in the score
0.15
Weighted contribution
7.25

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
53
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.70

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

CVNA: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

47

Neutral50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Financial specialist

Bearish

Specialist score 30Evidence confidence 70
What the specialist sees

Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $27,451 million with revenue growth of 50.3% against the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 8.7% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Why it matters

Revenue growth far above the sector revenue-growth median with operating margin merely at the sector operating-margin median implies scale is not yet producing a profitability edge, though the reason is unobserved.

What argues against it

If the next filing shows revenue growth decelerating further while operating margin falls below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median, the growth-led read would be wrong.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth-led claim.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 46.58. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +0.42. 47 on 2026-10-29 → 47 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Financial specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Risk specialist

    CVNA shows drawdown from the one-year high −28.6% versus maximum one-year drawdown −41.2%, twenty-day annualized volatility 69.0% against sixty-day annualized volatility 59.6% with a rising volatility trend, one-year large daily-move count 73, and downside beta 1.82 against SPY beta 2.22.

  3. News specialist

    The research data shows material-news net tone of 0.21 with good-news days followed by outperformance of 8 against good-news days followed by underperformance of 0, and the top items are earnings pieces at tier 1 and tier 2 with one-day return relative to SPY of 16.06.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

A later reading showing TTM revenue growth below the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth-led claim.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

CVNA: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Research evidence at a glance

Accepted specialist evidence · no score adjustment

Key figures

Fundamentals

Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $27,451 million with revenue growth of 50.3% against the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 8.7% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Valuation model

The base case pairs 5% revenue growth with a 4.1% FCF margin for a $25.1 fair value, 63% below the $68.29 close, while the bull case at 25% growth and 8.1% margin reaches $116.2, 70% above.

Potential upside

  • Base fair value of $25.1 is 63% below the $68.29 close, but the bull case at $116.2 is 70% above it, so the band spans both directions. Comps are neutral with no peer set: only 2 implied prices. Trailing-twelve-month EBIT margin is 8.7%.

Potential downside

  • Carvana grows at 50.3% trailing-twelve-month revenue growth, far above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median, but its 8.7% operating margin only matches the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Questions to watch

  • A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median would break the growth-led claim.

  • A later reading showing the FCF margin falling below the 2% grid column would break the neutral case.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Valuation the research computed

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $68.29 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-09-30.

Fair value by discounted cash flow, at the cells this run nominated.

Bear
$6.50−90% vs close
Base
$25.10−63% vs close
Bull
$116.20+70% vs close

The bear case sits more than 5× from the close: an extreme scenario, shown as the model computed it.

Implied by the median of 2 peer-median multiples: $73.31 (+7.3% vs close)

Peers: the 9 Liquid 100 names in Consumer Discretionary that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: AMZN, CCL, CMG, F, NCLH, NKE, SBUX, TSCO, TSLA.

Multiples against the peer group

Consumer Discretionary · 9 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)not reported on a comparable basis

    Peer median 18.96× · middle half 16.43× to 37.24×

  • Price to sales0.97×

    Peer median 1.45× · middle half 1.14× to 3.27× · 22nd percentile of the group

  • Price to book6.13×

    Peer median 4.01× · middle half 2.77× to 9.07× · 62nd percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield4.17%

    Peer median 3.08% · middle half 0.23% to 3.67% · 78th percentile of the group

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: 10 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; no full-year shares-outstanding figure was filed; tax expense is not among this research’s inputs; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple; diluted earnings per share was withheld because it disagrees with net income.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

Carvana (CVNA) research | Sagehood