CAT — Caterpillar Inc.

Report date: 2026-05-26  |  Sector: Industrials  |  Last price: $879.89  |  Horizon: 30d  |  Generated: 2026-05-26T07:16:05.608213Z

Forecast summary

Ensemble point +4.01%
80% CI [-5.47%, +14.76%]
95% CI [-9.96%, +20.92%]
Method dispersion 0.0404
Beats RW baseline YES
MC drift (annual) 68.81%
MC sigma (annual) 41.27%
MC paths 1000
Bull target (90th pct) +28.45% -> $1,130.20
Base target (50th) +7.54% -> $946.21
Bear target (10th pct) -10.50% -> $787.50
Macro regime risk_on_growth
10y yield 4.56%
3m yield 3.59%
Yield-curve slope +0.97%
VIX level 16.59
VIX z-score (252d) -0.48
Sector ETF XLI
Sector relative (90d) +33.48%

Forecast plot (interactive)

Realised volatility

Yang-Zhang annualized (60d) 41.27%
Close-to-close annualized (60d) 40.92%

Per-method comparison

MethodWeightPoint80% lo80% hi95% lo95% hi
linear 25.0% +8.54% +4.85% +12.20% +3.28% +14.21%
monte_carlo 25.0% +7.54% -10.50% +28.45% -19.08% +40.36%
ar1 25.0% -0.03% -2.66% +2.67% -4.03% +4.13%
random_walk 25.0% +0.00% -13.57% +15.71% -20.00% +25.00%

Factor contributions (interactive waterfall)

Factor contribution table

FactorLoadingTicker valueContribution
value_score +0.0495 -1.4575 -0.0721
quality_score +0.0192 +3.0000 +0.0577
momentum_score +0.0286 +3.0000 +0.0858
lowvol_score +0.0173 -0.5461 -0.0094
revisions_score +0.0236 +1.0100 +0.0239
news_activity_score +0.0402 +0.0000 +0.0000
(intercept) - - -0.0005

Factor decay over horizon

Factor IC over time

Per-factor IC backtest summary

FactorMean ICICIR% positiveCumulative attributionn periods
value_score +0.2563 +2.690 100.0% +0.5383 252
quality_score +0.1105 +1.096 86.5% +0.2401 252
momentum_score +0.1428 +1.354 92.5% +0.2460 252
lowvol_score +0.0878 +0.887 82.1% +0.1870 252
revisions_score +0.1375 +1.319 88.9% +0.2738 252
news_activity_score +0.3540 +3.832 100.0% +1.0893 252

Snapshot — fundamentals + technical

Market cap $405.27B
P/E (trailing) 43.9
P/B 21.7
Forward P/E 29.5
PEG 2.09
Dividend yield 69.00%
Beta 1.62
52w high / low $931.35 / $339.50
Distance from 52w high -5.53%
Cross-sectional rank 54 / 92 median
Panel source (trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), universe_size=92, lookback_days=252)
RSI(14) 55.6
SMA50 / SMA200 $798.08 / $623.94
ATR(14) $27.94
Avg volume (20d) 2.58M
Profit margin 13.33%
ROE 51.33%
Revenue growth (YoY) +22.20%
Earnings growth (YoY) +30.20%
Debt/Equity 230.8
Current ratio 1.35
Short ratio 3.52

Forecast accuracy — walk-forward backtest (60d lookback)

Horizonn predictionsDirectional accuracyMAE (return)RMSE80% CI hit ratePearson(pred, real)
1d 691 50.8% 1.41% 1.99% 82.2% -0.066
30d 662 57.9% 11.35% 13.68% 65.0% +0.007
60d 632 56.0% 19.26% 23.83% 56.5% -0.037

Volume momentum (Granville / CGW / Quong-Soudack)

Composite z +0.215
Active signals 7 of 7
MFI(14) 48.77
CMF(20) +0.1303
OBV z (252d) +1.094
VPT z (252d) +1.636
VW-momentum z +0.588
Volume z (60d) -0.691
Relative volume (vs 20d ADV) 0.77x
CMF z (252d) +0.320

Sector rotation & AI-spillover (v6)

Sector ETF XLI
Rel-return 5d / 20d / 60d -1.17% / +6.15% / +18.32%
Sector mom-z 1m / 3m / 6m -1.98 / -2.06 / -0.06
Rotation phase cyclical
AI-factor beta (60d) +0.321
AI spillover score +0.0295
Risk-off corr regime (60d) 0.33 (>0.6 = risk-off; <0.35 = stock-picking)
Sector breadth (% > SMA50) -
Sector dispersion 20d -

Peer comparison (sector-relative valuation & momentum)

Peer signal
EXPENSIVE LEADER
score +0.00 (9 peers)
P/E percentile
78% (78% cheaper than this)
20d momentum percentile
78% (78% lag this)
Market-cap percentile
100%
Peer set (mcap band 0.2x-5x, same sector)
GE GEV RTX BA UNP ETN HON DE VRT
9 peers in Industrials (mcap band 0.2x-5x); signal=expensive_leader; score=+0.00
Decision input: cheap_leader → nudge bias one bucket toward LONG; expensive_laggard → nudge toward SHORT; cheap_laggard = value-trap (neutralize); expensive_leader = crowding risk (neutralize). Folded into Claude critique and one-line PM summary.

Multi-timeframe technical analysis (1wk / 1d / 1h)

Per-timeframe verdict (TradingView-style aggregate of 17 indicators: RSI, MACD, BBands, ADX, Stoch, %R, OBV, MFI, CMF, ATR, SMA50/200, EMA9/21, Donchian, price-vs-SMA200). Counts = how many indicators fired BUY / SELL / NEUTRAL; net strength is the weight-sum delta. Crosses (golden/death, MACD signal cross, Donchian breakout) and the SMA200 trend filter carry 1.5x weight.
1wk verdict
NEUTRAL
4 buy / 4 sell / 9 neutral · net +0.0
1d verdict
NEUTRAL
2 buy / 3 sell / 12 neutral · net +2.0
1h verdict
NEUTRAL
3 buy / 1 sell / 13 neutral · net +2.5

1wk NEUTRAL 4/4/9

RSI(14) 75.4
MACD hist +10.0086
Bollinger %b 0.86
ADX(14) 51.3 RISING
ATR % 6.09%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 47.6 / +0.134
Donchian pos / break 0.85
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars521

1d NEUTRAL 2/3/12

RSI(14) 55.5
MACD hist -8.7194
Bollinger %b 0.49
ADX(14) 27.4
ATR % 3.18%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 48.8 / +0.130
Donchian pos / break 0.59
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars1253

1h NEUTRAL 3/1/13

RSI(14) 52.4
MACD hist +1.9577
Bollinger %b 0.62
ADX(14) 21.6
ATR % 0.91%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 51.2 / +0.073
Donchian pos / break 0.60
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars1728

Cross-timeframe confluence

Confluence LONG (0-1) 0.20
Confluence SHORT (0-1) 0.00
Patterns are intentionally selective (Elder triple-screen, daily/hourly divergence, BB-squeeze+breakout, SMA-alignment, MACD/OBV). Most tickers fire 0-2 patterns on any given day. Below: each pattern with its current state (✓ firing / ✗ not firing).
Long patterns
elder_triple
daily_oversold_hourly_bull
bb_squeeze_break_up
sma_align_long
macd_cross_obv
Short patterns
elder_triple
daily_overbought_hourly_div
bb_squeeze_break_dn
sma_align_short
macd_cross_obv

Intraday nowcast — 1h-bar short-horizon (v6)

Next 24h nowcast
+0.62%
over next 24h on 1h bars
80% band
[-6.59%, +8.37%]
n_bars = 1728 · sigma_1h = 0.0118
Direction vs 30d ensemble
AGREES
1h direction: LONG · 30d direction: LONG
Source: intraday_forecaster_v10_trained_lgbm.
(trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), mean_directional_accuracy=0.523, n_features=17) Decision input only -- the 30d ensemble + factor regression remain the primary call. Conflicts surfaced into the Claude critique as horizon_conflict flag when |1h move| > 1%.

Meta-label gate — AFML Ch.3 secondary classifier (v6)

Verdict
meta-label: NEUTRAL
p_take = 0.53 · threshold 0.60
Bias adjustment
meta-label NEUTRAL (p_take=0.53 between 0.40 and 0.60) -- no adjustment.
Method: secondary LightGBM trained on (features + primary direction) -> P(primary is right). Source: meta_labeler_v10_trained_lgbm.
(trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), roc_auc=0.641, accuracy=0.608, n_train_rows=8,284) When ABSTAIN with p_take < 1-threshold AND bias non-neutral, the bias is demoted one bucket and a meta_abstain flag is added to the critique. See AFML Ch.3.6 (Lopez de Prado 2018).

Implied vol vs realized vol — options-trade gate (v8 W2)

Regime
NEUTRAL
no decisive vol mispricing — delta-1 setup over options
IV / RV ratio
1.01
z-score: n/a (insufficient history)
30d IV vs 30d RV
IV 38.9% (Polygon)
RV 38.6% (yang-zhang)
Provenance: source polygon_options:contracts_call; expiry 2026-06-26 (31d) · strike $880.00 · 1 strike(s) used.
Caveat: 15-min delayed end-of-day quotes; free-tier Polygon (no Greeks, no real-time). Regime is qualitative input only — NOT a numeric factor on the regression.

FMP fundamentals & analyst consensus (v7)

Quality / leverage

ROE 51.3%
ROIC -
FCF yield -
Debt / EBITDA -
Current ratio 1.35

Margins / valuation

Gross margin 28.6%
Operating margin 18.2%
Net margin 13.3%
P/E (TTM) 43.9
EV / EBITDA 30.6

Analyst consensus

Target mean -
Target high / low - / -
Upside vs last close -
Revisions score +0.000

Trade-bias signal — foundation for trade-guidance layer

Bias strong_buy
Composite z-score +2.146
Conviction 0.8585015900882673
Recommended playbook A_strong
Suggested position size 0% (no Kelly)
no Kelly: not a conformal singleton (proxy off); singleton-proxy: news_activity_z=+0.00 (nonzero=False), wf30d_dir_acc=0.5785498489425982 (>0.55=True)
Strategies on bias side
Aggressive long-call (40-60 DTE, delta 0.55-0.70, size up)
Bull call-debit spread (long ATM + short 1 SD OTM, 40-60 DTE)
Long-dated LEAPS for thesis with multi-month conviction
Cash-secured short put as covered-position entry
Why this bias
composite_z = +2.15 | bias = strong_buy | conviction = 0.86 | macro_regime = risk_on_growth | ensemble = +4.01%

Sensitivity (OFAT tornado ±1 sd) and stress scenarios

FactorLoading wiTicker z-value+1 sd impact-1 sd impact
value_score +0.0495 -1.458 +0.0495 -0.0495
news_activity_score +0.0402 +0.000 +0.0402 -0.0402
momentum_score +0.0286 +3.000 +0.0286 -0.0286
revisions_score +0.0236 +1.010 +0.0236 -0.0236
quality_score +0.0192 +3.000 +0.0192 -0.0192
lowvol_score +0.0173 -0.546 +0.0173 -0.0173

Stress scenarios (forecast shift from base point)

ScenarioDescriptionStressed pointDelta vs base
rates_+100bps Yield curve +100bps (lowvol -1sd, value -0.5sd) +4.33% -4.20%
recession_risk_off Recession (momentum -1.5sd, lowvol +1sd, news -1sd) +1.95% -6.58%
quality_flight Quality flight (quality +1sd, revisions +1sd, momentum -0.5sd) +11.39% +2.86%

Multi-source live sentiment (free real-time)

Composite z-score -1.153
Active signals 2 of 3
Sources apewisdom, iv_skew
StockTwits bull 0
StockTwits bear 0
StockTwits net +0.00
Message volume 0
ApeWisdom mentions 1
24h change +0
Reddit rank 230
25-delta IV skew +1.6755
IV-skew read bearish

Analyst critique

Agreement with model agree_with_caveats
Confidence 0.55
PM one-liner CAT Industrials: quant +4.01%/30d, disp +0.0404, beats RW, macro neutral, 0 catalyst(s).
Sensitivity concern If value_score (the highest-loading factor) is mis-measured by +/-1 stdev, the bias likely flips.

What the model may have missed

Critique flags

Factor contribution methodology — where the numbers come from

Point return formula (linear factor model): r_hat = alpha + sum_i (w_i × f_i) where w_i is the cross-sectional loading for factor i (estimated from the cross-section of US large-cap names) and f_i is the z-scored factor value for this ticker (Grinold-Kahn winsorization at ±3).

Per-factor contribution shown in the waterfall above is exactly w_i × f_i (decimal-return units), so the bars sum (with intercept) to the linear forecast point. The ensemble point combines linear / Monte Carlo / AR(1) / random-walk per per-method-comparison table.

Bias mapping (composite z-score → LONG/NEUTRAL/SHORT): weighted sum of value (1.0), quality (0.7), momentum (1.0), low-vol (0.5), revisions (1.0), news-activity (0.6); thresholds ±1.0 with macro override (risk-off + LONG → reduce to NEUTRAL; risk-on-growth + SHORT → reduce to NEUTRAL). LONG → Playbook A (long-call / call-debit-spread / covered-call); SHORT → Playbook B (long-put / put-debit-spread / bear-call-spread); NEUTRAL → cash.

Sensitivity (one-factor-at-a-time tornado above): impact = w_i × 1sd per factor (MSCI / Two-Sigma Venn convention). Stress scenarios are canned multi-factor shocks (rates +100bps; recession risk-off; quality flight).

Factor decay uses exponential half-life per factor type: catalysts 7d, news 14d, revisions 30d, momentum 45d, value 90d, quality 90d (Tetlock 2007; Cohen-Malloy-Pomorski 2012). The heatmap above shows contribution × exp(-ln(2) × t / half_life) on a 5-day grid.

Factor IC backtest: Spearman rank correlation between each factor's cross-sectional ranking on day t and the realized h-day-forward return, aggregated across the panel (Grinold-Kahn 2000 ch.4 fundamental law of active management). Source for this report: synthetic_panel_252d_100tickers_seed42 (parallel runner).

Placebo audit (v6, GT-Score): GT-score = 0.58 SPURIOUS — setup likely lacks real signal . Computed from 3 seed(s) across placebo kinds: shuffled, gaussian_iid, garch. Method: real directional accuracy = 50.8%; max placebo accuracy = 58.6%; AMG = -0.078. Source: placebo_audit_v6_ar1_runner. Provenance: arXiv 2604.15531 "Spurious Predictability in Financial ML" (Paper #3). Risk-flag spurious_predictability_audit_failed added to narrative.

Catalysts in window (30d)

No catalysts within the forecast window.

Analyst narrative

Bull case

CAT ensemble forecast is +4.01% with 80% band [-5.47%, +14.76%] over 30 days. Positive drivers: momentum_score, quality_score. 0 catalyst(s) in the window provide event-driven upside potential.

Bear case

Inter-method dispersion (+0.0404) and beats random-walk argue caution. Negative drivers: value_score. Macro regime risk_on_growth historically caps single-name conviction.

Synthesis

Weight the ensemble's +4.01% center against +0.0404 method dispersion. Risk On Growth regime + 0 catalyst(s) define the setup. Treat the 80% band as the working trade-sizing envelope.

Risk flags