Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · Consumer Electronics · NASDAQ
$336.13
▼ $0.87 (-0.3%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:23 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$4.91T
Day Range
$332.53 - $338.49
52-Week Range
$243.42 - $344.57
Beta
1.08
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$300.00
Resistance
$344.57
AAPL is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+41.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 17/32 factors positiveRisk: High
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 22.7%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $98.69 vs. price $336.13 (-70.6%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
84/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
92/100
Analog Quality
+0.7%
Median 40D Outcome
61/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+3.1% … +12.8%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.9% … -0.9%
🔴 Bearish
47%
-8.9% … -4.0%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 60 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -0.9%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
15 occurrence(s) · 47% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.8% | -3.9% … +2.6% | +0.7% |
| 10D | 27% (11%–52%) | -1.9% | -3.7% … +1.8% | +1.4% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.9% | -4.9% … +3.4% | +2.5% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.7% | -2.5% … +9.8% | +4.3% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +4.7% | -2.8% … +6.0% | +6.4% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-08 | 84/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +14.6% | +32.5% |
| 2026-05-19 | 82/100 | Uptrend | -1.0% | +2.3% |
| 2025-11-06 | 81/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +3.3% | +2.5% |
| 2021-09-08 | 81/100 | Uptrend | -8.5% | +5.6% |
| 2023-05-09 | 81/100 | Uptrend | +3.5% | +5.9% |
| 2024-12-18 | 80/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -10.2% | -13.2% |
| 2024-08-29 | 80/100 | Uptrend | -0.9% | +0.0% |
| 2026-06-05 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +1.1% | +5.8% |
| 2024-06-04 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +14.0% | +18.2% |
| 2024-10-22 | 79/100 | Uptrend | -3.2% | -5.6% |
| 2025-12-04 | 79/100 | Uptrend | -4.8% | -6.5% |
| 2026-02-09 | 78/100 | Uptrend | -5.0% | +4.7% |
| 2025-09-26 | 78/100 | Uptrend | +2.9% | +6.1% |
| 2025-02-25 | 78/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -9.4% | -18.2% |
| 2026-04-23 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +11.5% | +19.9% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLK (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
64
Today
60
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🔎 What Changed (vs. 30 days ago)
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
8d ago · $333.50
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 18 to 48 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
15d ago · $320.96
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 12 to 39 day-over-day
What happened after
16d ago · $327.78
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 38 to 12 day-over-day
What happened after
25d ago · $309.06
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
26d ago · $310.34
Evidence: 4 bullish / 5 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
26d ago · $310.34
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
26d ago · $312.04
Evidence: attention score 63/100
What happened after
27d ago · $309.35
Evidence: 4 bullish / 5 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
27d ago · $309.35
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
28d ago · $309.35
Evidence: 4 bullish / 5 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
28d ago · $309.35
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
29d ago · $309.35
Evidence: 4 bullish / 5 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
29d ago · $309.35
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
29d ago · $309.35
Evidence: 4 bullish / 6 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $317.41
Evidence: +3.9pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $317.41
Evidence: 3 bullish / 7 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $310.57
Evidence: +3.2pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
32d ago · $310.19
Evidence: 3 bullish / 6 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 18, 2026
Then
56
$310.45
Now
64
$336.13
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
59
Quality
58
Value
33
Momentum
85
Risk
42
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
70
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING AAPL...
Recent coverage of Apple Inc. highlights retail and analyst focus on the launch of its foldable iPhone Duo. News also centers on leadership changes under new
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Apple Inc.. News trend score: 74. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
36
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
70
Technical
85
Valuation
33
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
+13%
Market Narrative
70
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+29
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests dominant herding alignment, as AAPL's +1.7% gain aligns with broader peer advances of +2.4%. Elevated overconfidence evidence highlights a divergence between strong +7.2% price momentum and modest +0.2% EPS growth, alongside a +237% price premium over DCF fair value. Furthermore, a narrative score of 70 against a reality score of 41 reflects an active narrative gap. The key open question is whether participant behavior will continue following sector movement as trading approaches the 3.7% distance from resistance.
Updated: 09/14/2026, 07:20 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Apple unveils its first foldable iPhone and iPhone 18 Pro today as investors watch what AAPL stock will do ahead of the keynote."
"An Apple iPhone event is on tap."
"Apple’s newest CEO walked into the top job with a $55 million equity target and eight days to prepare before stepping onto the keynote stage to pitch the most expensive iPhone the company has ever attempted to sell."
"It's usually not a good idea to bet against this company."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 24D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Thorstein Veblen — 71/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Thorstein Veblen's documented principles, the model estimates that the stock's growth aligns with real value creation, giving it the highest score. In contrast, Benjamin Graham's defensive criteria lead the model to rate the stock at zero, indicating it is not statistically cheap enough. Mid‑range scores from the efficient‑market view, Livermore, Mackay and Smith reflect mixed evidence or modest optimism, while the lower scores from Howard Marks, Loeb, Housel, Schwager and Bagehot highlight concerns about cycle timing, risk, liquidity and volatility, prompting caution. These divergent assessments illustrate how each methodology weights growth, valuation, risk and market dynamics differently.
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 61
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 55
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 52
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 46
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 37
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 30
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 30
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 23
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 14
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 8
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 3
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 1 bearish · 1 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$300.00
Range Bottom
$344.57
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
46.9%
Operating Margin
32.0%
Net Margin
26.9%
EBITDA Margin
34.8%
ROE
151.9%
ROA
31.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.49
Cash
$35.93B
Total Debt
$90.68B
Current Ratio
0.89
Debt/Equity
1.23
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.8.2026 | $0.270 |
| 11.5.2026 | $0.270 |
| 10.5.2026 | $0.270 |
| 9.2.2026 | $0.260 |
| 8.2.2026 | $0.260 |
| 10.11.2025 | $0.260 |
| 9.11.2025 | $0.260 |
| 11.8.2025 | $0.260 |
| 10.8.2025 | $0.260 |
| 12.5.2025 | $0.260 |
| 11.5.2025 | $0.260 |
| 10.2.2025 | $0.250 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$336.13
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$98.69
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-70.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
1.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.9% | $100.63B | $92.32B |
| 2 | 2.0% | $102.68B | $86.42B |
| 3 | 2.2% | $104.93B | $81.02B |
| 4 | 2.3% | $107.39B | $76.08B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $110.07B | $71.54B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$98.77B
Terminal Value
$1.74T
Present Value of Terminal Value
$1.13T
Enterprise Value
$1.54T
Net Debt
$54.74B
Equity Value
$1.48T
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$4.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$4.91
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 10 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Apple Inc. (AAPL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 64/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
AAPL currently scores 64/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, AAPL's estimated fair value is $98.69, which is 70.6% below the current price of $336.13. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AAPL's technical score is 85/100, which currently reads as bullish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 22.7%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 151.9% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $98.69 vs. price $336.13 (-70.6%); Current ratio: 0.89; Free cash flow growth: -9.2%.
Yes — AAPL has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 15 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 1,438 | -1,438 | $317.23 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 1,439 | -1,439 | $317.01 |
| Ternus John | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 7,690 | +7,690 | — |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 37,229 | -1,439 | $310.95 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 1,439 | -1,439 | $310.95 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 1,439 | -1,439 | $307.49 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 1,439 | -1,439 | $307.75 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 40,107 | -1,439 | $307.75 |
| Borders Ben | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 116 | -116 | $295.14 |
| Borders Ben | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 240 | -240 | — |
| Borders Ben | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.6.2026 | 124 | -124 | $296.42 |
| Borders Ben | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 240 | +240 | — |
| Newstead Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 30,104 | -30,104 | — |
| Newstead Jennifer | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.6.2026 | 16,238 | -16,238 | $296.42 |
| Newstead Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 30,104 | +30,104 | — |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Gift | 27.5.2026 | 65,000 | -65,000 | — |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Open Market Sale | 27.5.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | $311.02 |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Open Market Sale | 27.5.2026 | 3,764,576 | -50,000 | $311.02 |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Gift | 27.5.2026 | 3,699,576 | -65,000 | — |
| Borders Ben | Open Market Sale | 8.5.2026 | 1,274 | -1,274 | $290.00 |
| Borders Ben | Open Market Sale | 8.5.2026 | 38,713 | -1,274 | $290.00 |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Open Market Sale | 6.5.2026 | 100,473 | -100,473 | $285.04 |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Gift | 6.5.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | — |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Open Market Sale | 6.5.2026 | 149,527 | -149,527 | $284.57 |
| LEVINSON ARTHUR D | Open Market Sale | 6.5.2026 | 3,920,049 | -149,527 | $284.57 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
139,749,097 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 141,606,163 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 56.7% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology