Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$116.33
▼ $0.27 (-0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:00 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$58.32B
Day Range
$115.10 - $116.81
52-Week Range
$105.43 - $130.22
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$113.60
Resistance
$130.22
AFL is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+7.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/21 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): -9.3%
Growth
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
82/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+4.9%
Median 40D Outcome
63/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+4.4% … +6.8%
🟡 Base
20%
-0.0% … +0.3%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-9.6% … -1.8%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 10 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +3.9%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
5 occurrence(s) · 60% historical success
Echo #2 — Trend Acceleration
4 occurrence(s) · 75% 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 | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.0% | -0.7% … +2.6% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.0% | -0.2% … +3.2% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +3.9% | -0.6% … +5.8% | +1.4% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +4.9% | +1.6% … +8.0% | +2.5% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +4.8% | -0.4% … +9.6% | +3.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-26 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +5.9% | +9.8% |
| 2025-06-25 | 81/100 | Downtrend | -0.0% | +5.4% |
| 2023-03-06 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -5.2% | -5.9% |
| 2019-10-03 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.9% | +3.0% |
| 2020-01-22 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -2.0% | -30.6% |
| 2025-01-08 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.0% | -3.4% |
| 2020-02-06 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -22.7% | -32.2% |
| 2021-07-16 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +7.8% | +2.6% |
| 2025-08-07 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +4.5% | +4.8% |
| 2022-09-21 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +0.6% | +16.0% |
| 2023-06-23 | 77/100 | Consolidation | +7.9% | +15.2% |
| 2023-04-26 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.3% | +10.8% |
| 2024-03-04 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +6.5% | +9.3% |
| 2026-01-20 | 76/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +4.0% | +4.1% |
| 2025-07-24 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +5.6% | +5.1% |
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 XLF (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
51
Today
42
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.
25d ago · $116.55
Evidence: 0 bullish / 11 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
25d ago · $117.40
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
26d ago · $118.20
Evidence: 1 bullish / 10 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
27d ago · $116.07
Evidence: 0 bullish / 11 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
27d ago · $116.07
Evidence: 0 bullish / 11 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
28d ago · $116.07
Evidence: 0 bullish / 11 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $117.40
Evidence: -4.3pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $119.69
Evidence: 1 bullish / 8 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $122.04
Evidence: 1 bullish / 9 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
46
$121.68
Now
51
$116.33
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
32
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
48
Risk
58
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
56
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING AFL...
Recent media coverage of Aflac has focused on its financial stability and strategic partnerships. The company was highlighted as one of Wall Street’s safest high-yield dividend stocks with over 25 years of dividend increases, while its CFO participated in the 2026 KBW Insurance Conference. Additionally, Aflac announced a notable collaboration with Artists Equity, co-founded by Ben Affleck, to develop a film project together, blending pop culture with the brand. No cybersecurity or earnings details directly tied to Aflac itself were prominently featured.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Aflac. News trend score: 68. Reason: 6 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
10
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
56
Technical
48
Valuation
50
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+1%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests **herding** dominates, as AFL’s decline aligns closely with peers, indicating passive following rather than independent action. Confirmation bias and anchoring further reinforce this, with traders focusing on narrative gaps and proximity to support. The absence of panic or loss aversion signals suggests no urgent sell-off pressure. The key question: *Will the narrative gap persist, or will reality (e.g., earnings) disrupt the herd’s alignment?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 12:54 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Not all Dividend Aristocrats are created equal, and three companies spanning payroll processing, supplemental insurance, and integrated energy have quietly stacked 25-plus years of annual raises"
"AF Legal Group Ltd (ASX:AFL) reports a 29% surge in revenue to $35.5 million, with strong early FY27 momentum"
"Aflac, the leading provider of supplemental health insurance in the U.S., officially unveil a new partnership to bring The Man and The Duck to the screen together"
📈 19D 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 — 86/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with the highest scores clustering around technical and cyclical approaches while the lowest align with strict valuation and growth-focused frameworks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson, Morgan Housel, and Jack Schwager all see it as a disciplined, favorable setup—whether through oversold cycle positioning, quiet compounding potential, or a disciplined reward/risk trade—but their optimism contrasts sharply with Peter Lynch and Benjamin Graham’s Enterprising Investor, who dismiss it outright as either lacking growth or failing statistical cheapness. Meanwhile, mid-tier scorers like Howard Marks and Philip Fisher acknowledge its merits but temper enthusiasm, noting potential overvaluation or mediocrity compared to their standards. The divide underscores a tension between cyclical/technical optimism and fundamental skepticism, with even the most bullish models (Nelson, Housel) stopping short of Lynch’s or Graham’s absolute thresholds.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 79
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 67
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 66
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 63
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 63
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 55
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 53
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 51
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 49
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 28
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 20
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 10
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 5 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.
The stock is in a clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
21.2%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
12.4%
ROA
3.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.84
Cash
$6.25B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 19.8.2026 | $0.610 |
| 20.5.2026 | $0.610 |
| 19.5.2026 | $0.610 |
| 18.2.2026 | $0.610 |
| 17.2.2026 | $0.610 |
| 19.11.2025 | $0.580 |
| 18.11.2025 | $0.580 |
| 20.8.2025 | $0.580 |
| 19.8.2025 | $0.580 |
| 21.5.2025 | $0.580 |
| 20.5.2025 | $0.580 |
| 19.2.2025 | $0.580 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$55.13
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$54.65
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 11 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Barchart · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
PR Newswire · 5.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
PR Newswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 1.9.2026
Aflac (AFL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
AFL currently scores 51/100 (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.
AFL's technical score is 48/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; ATR: 1.6% of price; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Revenue growth (last year): -9.3%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -29.2%; Net income growth: -33.0%.
Yes — AFL 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 25 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 2,100 | -2,100 | $116.11 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 11,500 | -11,500 | $115.32 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 150 | -150 | $118.17 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 14,850 | -14,850 | $117.46 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 20,000 | -20,000 | $118.49 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 13,500 | -13,500 | $117.19 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 8,670 | -8,670 | $115.65 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 4,130 | -4,130 | $116.01 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 12,700 | -12,700 | $116.00 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 13,000 | -13,000 | $116.52 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 27.8.2026 | 50,740,130 | -12,260 | $116.65 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 27.8.2026 | 50,739,690 | -440 | $117.25 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 27.8.2026 | 440 | -440 | $117.25 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 27.8.2026 | 12,260 | -12,260 | $116.65 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 13,200 | -13,200 | $117.35 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 50,752,390 | -13,200 | $117.35 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 12,066 | -12,066 | $116.44 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 634 | -634 | $117.37 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 50,765,590 | -634 | $117.37 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 50,766,224 | -12,066 | $116.44 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 50,778,290 | -5,735 | $118.18 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 50,784,025 | -7,765 | $117.90 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 7,765 | -7,765 | $117.90 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 5,735 | -5,735 | $118.18 |
| Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 50,791,870 | -12,820 | $116.28 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
11,015,826 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 12,345,430 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
36.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 30.7% 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