Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$181.29
▼ $9.00 (-4.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 11:44 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$115.48B
Day Range
$180.70 - $189.48
52-Week Range
$118.15 - $291.09
Beta
—
Next Earnings
01.10.2026
Support
$129.96
Resistance
$197.63
ACN is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-24.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/31 factors positiveRisk: Medium
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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $300.00 vs. price $181.29 (+65.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
68/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
86/100
Analog Quality
+1.9%
Median 40D Outcome
55/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
60%
+2.3% … +9.6%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
40%
-9.1% … -4.5%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 20 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 60% (95% CI 36%–80%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +2.0%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 100% 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%) | -0.1% | -2.7% … +5.0% | +0.5% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.7% | -2.7% … +3.3% | +1.0% |
| 20D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.0% | -5.6% … +5.9% | +1.8% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.9% | -13.6% … +10.0% | +2.4% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -5.4% | -18.1% … +8.6% | +3.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-28 | 68/100 | Consolidation | -23.3% | -34.0% |
| 2022-06-29 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +8.5% | -7.1% |
| 2022-12-06 | 67/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -7.9% | -5.5% |
| 2025-11-24 | 67/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +11.1% | -17.4% |
| 2022-12-23 | 67/100 | Downtrend | +2.7% | +2.1% |
| 2025-11-10 | 67/100 | Consolidation | +10.2% | -1.6% |
| 2022-11-09 | 67/100 | Consolidation | +9.6% | +8.0% |
| 2022-05-24 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +2.3% | +12.9% |
| 2026-03-19 | 64/100 | Downtrend | -2.9% | -18.8% |
| 2026-04-07 | 63/100 | Downtrend | -9.3% | -30.4% |
| 2026-01-05 | 62/100 | Consolidation | -8.6% | -25.4% |
| 2025-09-11 | 62/100 | Downtrend | +3.2% | +9.2% |
| 2025-10-24 | 62/100 | Consolidation | +1.7% | +15.1% |
| 2026-05-08 | 62/100 | Downtrend | -3.3% | -5.4% |
| 2025-10-10 | 62/100 | Downtrend | +2.0% | +13.7% |
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
59
Today
66
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.
5d ago · $195.00
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 14 to 43 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
25d ago · $186.67
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
25d ago · $186.67
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
26d ago · $186.53
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
26d ago · $186.53
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
27d ago · $185.28
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
27d ago · $185.28
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
28d ago · $185.28
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
28d ago · $185.28
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
29d ago · $185.28
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
29d ago · $185.28
Evidence: 9 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $182.40
Evidence: +7.2pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $182.40
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
31d ago · $182.40
Evidence: 8 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $176.35
Evidence: +4.7pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
32d ago · $176.35
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
32d ago · $176.35
Evidence: 8 bullish / 3 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
67
$174.06
Now
59
$181.29
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
64
Quality
47
Value
62
Momentum
44
Risk
48
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
70
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING ACN...
Recent media coverage of Accenture has primarily focused on its strategic expansion into AI-driven services, particularly through its new **Accenture Gemini Enterprise Business Group**, formed in partnership with Google Cloud to embed AI engineers directly with clients. Analysts also compared Accenture’s consulting model to Palantir’s, revisiting debates about revenue structures in tech-enabled services. Additionally, there were brief mentions of broader industry trends, including AI deployment growth and competitive dynamics with peers like IBM, though no major standalone Accenture developments were highlighted beyond the Google Cloud partnership.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Accenture. News trend score: 80. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
11
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
11
Fundamentals
70
Technical
44
Valuation
62
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+42%
Market Narrative
39
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
ACN’s psychology is fragmented but dominated by **FOMO (22)** and **Euphoria (18)**, reflecting positive momentum, positive sentiment, and a slight premium to its 200-day average. The **narrative-reality gap (11)** suggests traders may be overestimating fundamentals, as the stock trades **41% below DCF fair value** despite bullish technicals. **Anchoring (8)** hints at traders fixating on resistance, while **Overconfidence (3)** implies some may ignore valuation discrepancies. The key question: *Is the momentum-driven rally sustainable, or will valuation concerns eventually curb euphoria?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:28 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Accenture and Google Cloud Deepen Partnership with Formation of New Accenture Gemini Enterprise Business Group"
"Can Innodata Make Agentic AI Deployment an Enterprise Growth Driver?"
"Burry’s Palantir warning is back. Accenture shows what investors should check"
"Where the figure [IBM’s AI revenue] went, and what management counts instead, is the more useful question."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 22D 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
Charles Mackay — 82/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with scores ranging from a cautious 24 to a bullish 69. The most optimistic models—like those of Edgar Lawrence Smith and Morgan Housel—highlight its potential as a long-term compounder or a patient investor’s quiet hold, emphasizing steady growth and patient capital alignment. Meanwhile, value-focused frameworks like Benjamin Graham’s strict criteria and Peter Lynch’s growth-at-a-reasonable-price test dismiss it outright, scoring poorly due to perceived valuation or growth inconsistencies. Even cycle-aware approaches, such as Howard Marks’ market timing or Samuel Nelson’s overbought warning, temper enthusiasm, while technical or efficiency-based models (e.g., Schwager or Efficient Market Theory) outright reject it as lacking clear trends or alpha potential. The contrast underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in narrative-driven optimism (e.g., crowd excitement or patient holding) or fundamental flaws that discount it entirely.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 82
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 78
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 68
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 65
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 61
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 58
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 50
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 44
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 31
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 24
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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 a downtrend (3 bullish · 6 bearish · 2 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.
The stock is in a clear uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Medium confidence
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
31.9%
Operating Margin
14.7%
Net Margin
11.0%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
24.6%
ROA
11.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$12.29
Cash
$11.48B
Total Debt
$114.48M
Current Ratio
1.42
Debt/Equity
0.17
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 9.7.2026 | $1.630 |
| 8.7.2026 | $1.630 |
| 9.4.2026 | $1.630 |
| 8.4.2026 | $1.630 |
| 10.7.2025 | $1.480 |
| 9.7.2025 | $1.480 |
| 10.4.2025 | $1.480 |
| 9.4.2025 | $1.480 |
| 16.1.2025 | $1.480 |
| 15.1.2025 | $1.480 |
| 10.10.2024 | $1.480 |
| 9.10.2024 | $1.480 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$181.29
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$300.00
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+65.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.2% | $11.33B | $10.40B |
| 2 | 3.8% | $11.76B | $9.90B |
| 3 | 3.4% | $12.16B | $9.39B |
| 4 | 2.9% | $12.52B | $8.87B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $12.83B | $8.34B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$10.87B
Terminal Value
$202.29B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$131.48B
Enterprise Value
$178.37B
Net Debt
$-11.36B
Equity Value
$189.73B
*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
$50.14
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$46.27
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 7 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Accenture (ACN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 59/100, 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.
ACN currently scores 59/100 (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, ACN's estimated fair value is $300.00, which is 65.5% above the current price of $181.29. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ACN's technical score is 44/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: Estimated fair value: $300.00 vs. price $181.29 (+65.5%); Free cash flow growth: 26.2%; Return on equity (ROE): 24.6% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.25 (3y annualized return -17.0% / max drawdown 68.8%); Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — ACN 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 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Park Angie Y | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 145 | +145 | $189.10 |
| Burgum Melissa A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 106 | +106 | $189.10 |
| Unruch Joel | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 145 | +145 | $189.10 |
| Sharma Manish | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 97 | +97 | $189.10 |
| Walsh John F | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 146 | +146 | $189.10 |
| Clifford Katherine Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 92 | +92 | $189.10 |
| Hogan Catherine Kiernan | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 113 | +113 | $189.10 |
| Sweet Julie Spellman | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.9.2026 | 205 | +205 | $189.10 |
| Sharma Manish | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 17 | +17 | — |
| RENDUCHINTALA VENKATA S M | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 9 | +9 | — |
| Clifford Katherine Lee | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 68 | -68 | $175.98 |
| Clifford Katherine Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 50 | +50 | — |
| Sarin Arun | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 13 | +13 | — |
| Hogan Catherine Kiernan | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 50 | +50 | — |
| Price Paula A | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 14 | +14 | — |
| McKinstry Nancy | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 12 | +12 | — |
| Sweet Julie Spellman | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 47 | +47 | — |
| Unruch Joel | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 88 | +88 | — |
| Uotani Masahiko | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 9 | +9 | — |
| Nason Jennifer | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 9 | +9 | — |
| Burgum Melissa A | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 23 | +23 | — |
| Travis Tracey Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 15 | +15 | — |
| Brudermueller Martin | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 9 | +9 | — |
| Walsh John F | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.8.2026 | 24 | +24 | — |
| Burgum Melissa A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 9,621 | +117 | $170.35 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
25,425,891 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 32,939,144 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 65.4% 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