Most Undervalued SmallCap Stocks 2026 — Furthest Below Fair Value
SmallCap 600 stocks trading at the deepest discounts. Updated daily using 5 investment models.
As of Nov 6, 2026, the list has 50 stocks; CCOI ranks first.
Data as of
| # | Ticker | Score | Discount |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CCOI | 1.8 | 98% below FV |
| 2 | TALO | 5.4 | 91% below FV |
| 3 | VRRM | 3.5 | 90% below FV |
| 4 | CRGY | 6.6 | 89% below FV |
| 5 | CALM | 3.5 | 86% below FV |
| 6 | DXC | 3.2 | 86% below FV |
| 7 | MGY | 5.4 | 85% below FV |
| 8 | SKYW | 4.9 | 84% below FV |
| 9 | CRC | 4.3 | 82% below FV |
| 10 | VYX | 2.1 | 80% below FV |
| 11 | LYFT | 2.8 | 80% below FV |
| 12 | WU | 1.9 | 79% below FV |
| 13 | ABG | 3.4 | 79% below FV |
| 14 | PARR | 7.5 | 79% below FV |
| 15 | NAVI | 1.9 | 79% below FV |
| 16 | GRBK | 5.8 | 78% below FV |
| 17 | KNTK | 5.0 | 77% below FV |
| 18 | NE | 5.7 | 76% below FV |
| 19 | TDW | 6.4 | 76% below FV |
| 20 | LBRT | 4.0 | 74% below FV |
| 21 | LPG | 8.3 | 74% below FV |
| 22 | CNR | 5.5 | 73% below FV |
| 23 | BTU | 2.8 | 73% below FV |
| 24 | UPWK | 2.3 | 72% below FV |
| 25 | NOG | 4.7 | 71% below FV |
| 26 | LRN | 6.3 | 71% below FV |
| 27 | MHO | 5.3 | 71% below FV |
| 28 | AMPH | 3.9 | 70% below FV |
| 29 | EVTC | 5.0 | 68% below FV |
| 30 | KSS | 5.3 | 68% below FV |
| 31 | TRN | 3.3 | 67% below FV |
| 32 | CCS | 4.0 | 67% below FV |
| 33 | LKQ | 3.5 | 66% below FV |
| 34 | OGN | 6.8 | 65% below FV |
| 35 | KMT | 6.6 | 65% below FV |
| 36 | INVX | 5.8 | 64% below FV |
| 37 | FLO | 2.4 | 63% below FV |
| 38 | GPI | 3.7 | 61% below FV |
| 39 | VRTS | 3.9 | 61% below FV |
| 40 | HRMY | 5.5 | 61% below FV |
| 41 | MTH | 3.8 | 61% below FV |
| 42 | HUBG | 4.1 | 60% below FV |
| 43 | GIII | 4.6 | 60% below FV |
| 44 | HP | 4.9 | 59% below FV |
| 45 | CRI | 5.0 | 58% below FV |
| 46 | LGIH | 2.9 | 58% below FV |
| 47 | EFOR | 3.9 | 58% below FV |
| 48 | YELP | 3.2 | 58% below FV |
| 49 | SLVM | 3.0 | 57% below FV |
| 50 | BFH | 6.2 | 57% below FV |
Understanding the SmallCap Value Ranking
Small-cap value is the academic darling of factor investing. Fama and French (1992) found small, cheap stocks earned more than the market over long US samples. The premium has been far from steady, and the catch, as always, is that the premium comes packaged with the kind of risk that shakes investors out of their positions.
Liquidity is thin. Bid-ask spreads are wide. Analyst coverage is sparse, so a single downgrade can move the stock sharply in a day. A bad earnings quarter can send the price down hard before you have time to react. These are not theoretical risks; they are the daily reality of small-cap value investing, and they are exactly why the premium exists. If it were comfortable, it would be arbitraged away.
What systematic screening does is separate the uncomfortable-but-sound from the genuinely broken. AlphaStocks computes a fair value for the entire SmallCap 600 every day, one Damodaran method per sector profile. The discount percentage tells you how far each stock sits below estimated intrinsic value. But the discount alone is half the picture.
The other half is quality. Among deeply discounted small-caps, the difference between a future multibagger and a permanent capital loss often comes down to balance sheet health. Focus on stocks with Piotroski F-Scores of 6 or higher (the financials are stable or improving) and composite quality scores above 5 (the business has structural strength). That combination — deep discount, sound fundamentals — is what the two scores describe together; neither predicts returns, and our backtest found no statistically significant excess return from the scores.