Leidos Holdings, Inc. (LDOS): analysis and signal as of September 2, 2026
In short
The signal displayed for Leidos Holdings, Inc. As of 02/09/2026 is weak, with a vote of 3/3 and a score of 4.5. It reflects the tension between a quality fundamental profile and a deteriorated technical configuration, worsened by the unavailability of real-time sources, which prevents any verification of the second quarter 2026 results.
- Current signal
- weak (vote 3/3) divergence
- Deterministic score
- +4.5 → signal expected by the scale : strong (September 10, 2026)
- Layers
- fundamentals : neutral, price : negative, risks : positive
Triggered rules
| Rule | Weight |
|---|---|
| favors a high and durable return on invested capital (ROIC), a marker of a lasting moat | +2.0 |
| favors (GARP) a stock whose PEG is below 1, growth not yet paid for | +1.5 |
| favors robust fundamental health (high Piotroski F-Score) | +1.5 |
| penalizes direct holding of US securities in a CTO (US estate tax at death), favors a UCITS ETF domiciled in IE | -1.0 |
| moderately favors an asset with robust operating profitability (RMW factor), cross-check with accounting quality (possible manipulation) | +0.5 |
Thesis
The file combines a quality fundamental profile, with durable return on invested capital, a high Piotroski score and a structural competitive advantage built on federal contracts from the Department of Defense (DoD), intelligence and civilian health, and a deteriorated technical configuration, marked by a close below the 200-session moving average of -11,7 % and a bearish intraday profile over a six-month window, at -21,4 %. Real-time sources are unavailable (401/403 codes on Yahoo, Reuters, MarketWatch and SEC EDGAR), which prevents any verification of the second quarter 2026 results published in early August, lowers confidence on the fundamental layer to a medium level and rules out any numerical update. The GAO catalyst of 19/10/2026 and the clarification of the FCPA case concerning the chief financial officer remain the triggers to watch, with no dated new development that would justify a shift in the verdict issued on 30/08/2026.
Bull case
The main bullish argument rests on a defensible advantage lasting about 20 years, underpinned by federal barriers to access: security clearances, critical volume and sector expertise, which provide a cost advantage on multi-year contracts. Return on invested capital remains above the cost of capital. Exposure to the budgets of the Department of Defense, US intelligence and federal health is massive and independent of the general economic cycle. An attractive PEG and a high Piotroski score signal durable operational quality.
Bear case
The main bearish argument relies on a confirmed bearish technical configuration: a price below the 200-session moving average of -11,7 %, a deteriorated profile across closes as well as intraday, a flat to slightly bearish underlying trend and an acceleration of intraday bearish pressure over the six-month window. The valuation, with a PER of around 16-18x, already looks high against peers SAIC and CACI, which trade lower. There is also exposure to the US budget sequestration and the FCPA risk linked to the chief financial officer, still unresolved. No positive catalyst is identifiable in the short term and the macroeconomic calendar milestones remain indirect, with no direct impact on the stock.
Scenarios
The bullish scenario, with a 25 % probability, assumes a move back above the 200-session moving average and a positive GAO catalyst. The central scenario, at 50 %, describes a move contained within a range, with no identified catalyst. The bearish scenario, at 35 %, corresponds to a close below the 200-session moving average and the horizontal support, representing an amplitude of about -12,7 % from the price of 135,18 USD.
Risks
A close below the 200-session moving average and the horizontal support would invalidate the thesis. The FCPA case linked to the chief financial officer remains unresolved and constitutes a major legal uncertainty. Exposure to the US budget sequestration weighs on the visibility of federal revenues, while a PER of around 16-18x leaves little margin against peers SAIC and CACI. Finally, the unavailability of real-time sources (401/403 codes) deprives the analysis of any verification of the second quarter 2026 results and keeps fundamental confidence at a medium level.
Market positioning (short sellers)
- Short interest / shares outstanding
- 3.37 %
- Days to cover
- 2.14
- Settlement date
- 2026-08-14
- Source
- FINRA (disseminated on 2026-08-26)
Upcoming catalysts
| Date | Description |
|---|---|
| US federal budget vote for 2027, exposure to defense orders | |
| Expected Q3 2026 release |
Signal history (last 12 months)
| Date | Signal | New fact |
|---|---|---|
| weak (3/3) | No change. The verdict remains unchanged since the analysis of 30/08/2026. This is a personal analysis for information purposes, which does not constitute investment advice. | |
| weak (single draw, outside the three-draw protocol) | unchanged |
Frequently asked questions
What is the signal displayed for Leidos Holdings, Inc.?
As of 02/09/2026, the displayed signal is weak, with a vote of 3/3 and a score of 4.5. This verdict reflects the imbalance between a quality fundamental profile, including durable return on invested capital and a high Piotroski score, and a deteriorated technical configuration, with a close below the 200-session moving average of -11,7 %. No dated new development justifies a shift since the verdict of 30/08/2026.
Why is confidence in the fundamentals limited?
Real-time sources are unavailable, with 401/403 codes returned by Yahoo, Reuters, MarketWatch and SEC EDGAR. This outage prevents any verification of the second quarter 2026 results, published in early August, and rules out any numerical update. Confidence on the fundamental layer therefore remains lowered to a medium level. The triggers to watch remain the GAO catalyst of 19/10/2026 and the clarification of the FCPA case linked to the chief financial officer.
Why does the technical configuration pose a problem?
The stock closes below its 200-session moving average of -11,7 %, with a deteriorated profile across closes as well as intraday and a flat to slightly bearish underlying trend. The six-month window shows an acceleration of intraday bearish pressure, at -21,4 %. A close below the 200-session moving average and the horizontal support would invalidate the thesis. The recovery of this average would be the first technical marker of the bullish scenario.
How does the valuation compare with that of its peers?
The stock trades with a PER of around 16-18x, already considered high against peers SAIC and CACI, which trade lower. This positioning leaves little margin if the federal budget environment deteriorates, notably under the effect of a sequestration. The attractive PEG and the high Piotroski score qualify this reading by signalling durable operational quality, independent of the general economic cycle.
What is the group's competitive advantage?
The defensible advantage rests on federal barriers to access: security clearances, critical volume and sector expertise, maintained for about 20 years. These barriers provide a cost advantage on multi-year contracts. Exposure to the budgets of the Department of Defense, US intelligence and federal health is massive and independent of the general economic cycle, which supports return on invested capital above the cost of capital.
Sources
The official filings below are the issuer's own, matched to this stock by its identifier (LEI, CIK or ISIN). The figures quoted above come from an automated arbitration: they have not been re-checked one by one.
- — 10-Q (SEC · 10-Q)
- — 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition; 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits (SEC · 8-K)
- — 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers: Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers; 5.07 Sub… (SEC · 8-K)
- — 10-Q (SEC · 10-Q)
- — 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition; 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits (SEC · 8-K)
Automated AI analysis: limitations and transparency
- This content is an automated analysis produced using artificial intelligence. Personal analysis for information purposes — no personalised investment advice. MMR content consists of general research. It does not take account of your financial circumstances, objectives or risk tolerance. Data, analyses and results, including those produced using artificial intelligence, may contain errors, be incomplete or become outdated. No return or outcome is guaranteed. All investments carry a risk of partial or total loss of capital. Past performance and simulations do not predict future results. Before making any decision, check information against original sources and, where necessary, consult an authorised professional. You remain responsible for your investment decisions. This notice does not exclude or limit any liability that cannot legally be excluded or limited.
- Tool and analysis: QDNA, Aurélien Ambert.
- Analysis (arbitration) completed on September 2, 2026; this page was completed on September 4, 2026 at 00:42 (UTC).
- Interests: no position in the stock analysed (LDOS) is recorded in the data consulted on (UTC). This does not confirm the absence of holdings or other interests. The situation at the analysis publication date has not been reconstructed.
- This declaration covers only recorded positions in this stock; it is not an exhaustive verification of other interests or remuneration.
- Methodology: analysis chain, score formula and scale described on the public methodology page.
- Analysis horizon: 2035.
See also
- Neighbouring stock in the same sector: Apple Inc. (AAPL)
- All analysed stocks
- Public methodology