Most Undervalued MidCap Stocks 2026 — Graham Fair Value Discount
MidCap 400 stocks trading furthest below fair value. Updated daily using 5 investment models.
| # | Ticker | Score | Discount |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WHR | 2.5 | 52% below FV |
| 2 | NLY | 5.5 | 44% below FV |
| 3 | GPK | 3.1 | 44% below FV |
| 4 | PK | 5.3 | 43% below FV |
| 5 | STWD | 4.5 | 37% below FV |
| 6 | SON | 6.5 | 37% below FV |
| 7 | M | 6.2 | 36% below FV |
| 8 | MTDR | 5.4 | 36% below FV |
| 9 | VAL | 7.9 | 36% below FV |
| 10 | WTRG | 6.0 | 33% below FV |
| 11 | BIO | 4.1 | 32% below FV |
| 12 | TMHC | 7.1 | 31% below FV |
| 13 | BYD | 5.7 | 31% below FV |
| 14 | CNX | 4.5 | 31% below FV |
| 15 | KBH | 5.0 | 31% below FV |
| 16 | LAD | 4.6 | 30% below FV |
| 17 | SLM | 6.2 | 29% below FV |
| 18 | MAT | 3.8 | 28% below FV |
| 19 | PPC | 4.2 | 28% below FV |
| 20 | AA | 3.7 | 27% below FV |
| 21 | SIRI | 4.3 | 25% below FV |
| 22 | AN | 4.7 | 24% below FV |
| 23 | CRBG | 5.6 | 24% below FV |
| 24 | INGR | 5.5 | 24% below FV |
| 25 | OVV | 8.0 | 22% below FV |
| 26 | WAL | 6.4 | 22% below FV |
| 27 | AAL | 4.9 | 21% below FV |
| 28 | THO | 4.0 | 17% below FV |
| 29 | MLI | 4.4 | 15% below FV |
| 30 | VNO | 7.3 | 15% below FV |
| 31 | TOL | 6.9 | 13% below FV |
| 32 | ASB | 6.9 | 10% below FV |
| 33 | UGI | 5.0 | 10% below FV |
| 34 | PR | 6.1 | 10% below FV |
| 35 | ANF | 3.9 | 9% below FV |
| 36 | G | 4.2 | 9% below FV |
| 37 | POST | 3.7 | 8% below FV |
| 38 | GHC | 4.6 | 8% below FV |
| 39 | FNB | 7.2 | 7% below FV |
| 40 | MMS | 4.4 | 7% below FV |
| 41 | ZION | 7.8 | 5% below FV |
| 42 | IBOC | 7.2 | 5% below FV |
| 43 | RRC | 5.5 | 4% below FV |
| 44 | RYN | 5.4 | 4% below FV |
| 45 | JHG | 7.0 | 3% below FV |
| 46 | GAP | 4.0 | 3% below FV |
| 47 | HR | 6.8 | 2% below FV |
| 48 | SF | 4.3 | 2% below FV |
| 49 | MTG | 6.0 | 1% below FV |
| 50 | HOMB | 6.5 | 1% below FV |
Understanding the MidCap Value Ranking
Large-cap value opportunities are rare because 22 analysts per stock means mispricings get corrected fast. Small-cap value is plentiful but risky — thin liquidity, volatile earnings, and the constant threat that "cheap" really means "broken." Mid-cap value sits in between: enough analyst coverage to validate the thesis, but not so much that every discount gets arbitraged away instantly.
Graham's margin of safety — the idea that you should buy at a price low enough that even if you are partially wrong, you still come out ahead — finds its natural habitat here. The average MidCap 400 company has roughly 12 analysts (vs. 22 for the S&P 500), meaning fair value estimates are less tightly converged. When the consensus is wrong about a mid-cap, the correction can be material.
AlphaStocks calculates Graham fair value for every MidCap 400 stock using normalized earnings, expected growth, and a sector-appropriate discount rate. The discount percentage in this ranking shows how far each stock trades below that estimate. A -35% discount means the market price is 35% below what the model calculates as intrinsic value.
The critical caveat: a discount is not the same as a bargain. Some mid-caps trade cheaply because their business is in genuine decline — revenue contracting, margins compressing, debt rising. The Piotroski F-Score is your first-line defense here: an F-Score of 7+ means the financials are improving, not deteriorating. Cross-reference that with the quality score to confirm the business has structural strength. The best entries on this list are companies the market has temporarily mispriced, not permanently impaired.