Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$198.24
▲ $1.24 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/18 06:03 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$195.47 - $198.24
52-Week Range
$176.77 - $254.35
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
BA is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-8.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/32 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$115.66 vs. price $198.24 (-158.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (82/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
89/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
-0.4%
Median 40D Outcome
72/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+4.9% … +7.5%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.3% … -0.3%
🔴 Bearish
20%
-7.8% … -5.1%
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, 67% (95% CI 42%–85%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +4.8%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
6 occurrence(s) · 83% 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 | 27% (11%–52%) | -0.8% | -3.5% … +0.6% | +0.1% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | +0.1% | -3.3% … +3.0% | +0.4% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +4.8% | -0.3% … +7.0% | +0.1% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -6.9% … +9.5% | -0.7% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.9% | -4.2% … +7.9% | +0.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-05-10 | 89/100 | Downtrend | -0.2% | -6.3% |
| 2020-01-21 | 88/100 | Downtrend | +8.0% | -57.2% |
| 2021-10-27 | 83/100 | Downtrend | +1.9% | -1.2% |
| 2019-07-29 | 82/100 | Downtrend | +5.5% | -0.9% |
| 2019-12-13 | 82/100 | Downtrend | -2.7% | -54.7% |
| 2018-08-15 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +7.1% | +11.8% |
| 2025-09-17 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -0.3% | -6.5% |
| 2023-10-18 | 79/100 | Downtrend | +12.4% | +8.0% |
| 2021-07-15 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +6.9% | +1.6% |
| 2023-09-12 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -8.1% | +12.5% |
| 2025-11-05 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +2.2% | +18.0% |
| 2026-05-19 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +4.9% | +7.7% |
| 2024-03-11 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -7.5% | -1.4% |
| 2026-06-03 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +7.6% | -0.4% |
| 2026-03-16 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +4.8% | -2.1% |
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 XLI (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
46
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
27d ago · $214.20
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
27d ago · $214.20
Evidence: 1 bullish / 10 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
29d ago · $222.20
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
29d ago · $222.20
Evidence: 4 bullish / 7 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
30d ago · $223.06
Evidence: -4.0pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $223.78
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
31d ago · $223.78
Evidence: 4 bullish / 7 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
49
$224.52
Now
46
$198.24
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
82
Quality
58
Value
33
Momentum
17
Risk
36
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
42
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING BA...
Recent media coverage of Boeing has centered on a fatal cargo plane crash involving an Amazon-operated Boeing 767-300 freighter at Miami International Airport, which killed at least five people. Investigations are examining runway safety, aircraft speed, and the plane’s age (32 years old, previously used for commercial flights). Stocks for Boeing and Amazon have declined amid the inquiry, while unrelated reports mention a U.S. Navy contract win and market reactions to geopolitical tensions. No broader operational or financial updates were provided.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Boeing. News trend score: 86. Reason: 10 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
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
83
Fundamentals
42
Technical
17
Valuation
33
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-11%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior reflects a market where participants are aligning with peers rather than acting on independent signals. The narrative gap (14 points) suggests traders may be overestimating positive fundamentals relative to observable price action. Key uncertainty lies in whether this relative underperformance will persist or if external catalysts (e.g., sector shifts) could disrupt the herd’s consensus. Low volatility and neutral volume further imply cautious, not impulsive, movement. The absence of extreme states (e.g., panic or euphoria) suggests a measured, risk-averse environment.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:17 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Five people have died after an Amazon cargo plane overshot the runway at Miami International Airport, crashing into vehicles and catching fire."
"Investigators Probe Amazon Cargo Plane Crash"
"The Boeing aircraft is 32 years old and was used for commercial flights between 1994 and 2015 before being converted to a cargo plane."
"Boeing's Free Cash Flow Turned Positive. Here's What Has to Happen Next for the Turnaround to Stick."
📈 15D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 3/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between growth-oriented and value-focused methodologies. Peter Lynch, Charles Mackay, Thorstein Veblen, and Jack Schwager all score it near the top (80–81), celebrating its growth potential, disciplined setup, and lack of speculative mania—suggesting it’s a high-conviction play for investors prioritizing expansion and structural advantages. Meanwhile, Philip Fisher’s moderate 75 score acknowledges its quality but doesn’t elevate it to his ‘greatest’ tier, while Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s 65 flags it as cyclically favorable but not a slam dunk. The split becomes stark with Howard Marks (both cycle and general) and Morgan Housel, who see it as merely ‘holdable’ or ‘moderate’—implying it’s solid but not transformative. At the bottom, Graham’s methods (especially the strict Defensive Investor) and Bagehot’s liquidity concerns dismiss it outright, while Livermore and Loeb warn of trend resistance and risk—highlighting how the stock’s appeal hinges entirely on the investor’s framework: growth hunters cheer, while value purists and risk-averse traders walk away.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 82
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 80
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 75
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 75
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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)
🟡 48
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 47
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 34
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 29
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 25
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 18
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 12
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)
🔴 3
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 a downtrend (1 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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.
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
4.8%
Operating Margin
4.8%
Net Margin
2.5%
EBITDA Margin
7.0%
ROE
41.0%
ROA
1.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.49
Cash
$10.92B
Total Debt
$62.31B
Current Ratio
1.19
Debt/Equity
11.42
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$198.24
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$115.66
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-158.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
12.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.3% | $-2.11B | $-1.93B |
| 2 | 9.8% | $-2.31B | $-1.95B |
| 3 | 7.4% | $-2.49B | $-1.92B |
| 4 | 4.9% | $-2.61B | $-1.85B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-2.67B | $-1.74B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-1.88B
Terminal Value
$-42.15B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-27.40B
Enterprise Value
$-36.78B
Net Debt
$51.39B
Equity Value
$-88.17B
*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
$7.15
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$17.56
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 6 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Boeing (BA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 46/100, 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.
BA currently scores 46/100 (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, BA's estimated fair value is -$115.66, which is 158.3% below the current price of $198.24. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BA's technical score is 17/100, which currently reads as bearish — 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Revenue growth (last year): 34.5%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 113.5%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$115.66 vs. price $198.24 (-158.3%); Calmar: -0.02 (3y annualized return -1.0% / max drawdown 48.3%); Debt/equity: 11.42.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parker Stephen Kenneth | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.8.2026 | 629.68 | -629.68 | $209.08 |
| MALAVE JESUS JR | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.8.2026 | 4,205.138 | -4,205.138 | $228.65 |
| Raymond David Christopher | Gift | 14.8.2026 | 907 | -907 | — |
| Ortberg Robert Kelly | Tax Withholding in Shares | 10.8.2026 | 6,232.647 | -6,232.647 | $234.09 |
| Ortberg Robert Kelly | Tax Withholding in Shares | 10.8.2026 | 129,695 | -6,233 | $234.09 |
| Buckley Mortimer J | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 383 | +383 | — |
| Joyce David Leon | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 440 | +440 | — |
| GOOD LYNN J | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 406 | +406 | — |
| Doughtie Lynne M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 228 | +228 | — |
| JOHRI AKHIL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 406 | +406 | — |
| Harris Stayce D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 383 | +383 | — |
| Bradway Robert A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 406 | +406 | — |
| Gitlin David L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 383 | +383 | — |
| TILDEN BRADLEY D | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 383 | +383 | — |
| Richardson John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 228 | +228 | — |
| MOLLENKOPF STEVEN M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 669 | +669 | — |
| TILDEN BRADLEY D | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,236 | +383 | — |
| GOOD LYNN J | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 17,379 | +406 | — |
| Bradway Robert A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 16,283 | +406 | — |
| Buckley Mortimer J | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 2,935 | +383 | — |
| Doughtie Lynne M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5,859 | +228 | — |
| Gitlin David L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 7,676 | +383 | — |
| Harris Stayce D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 9,063 | +383 | — |
| JOHRI AKHIL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 11,725 | +406 | — |
| Joyce David Leon | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 10,044 | +440 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
15,920,835 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 15,447,762 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 34.1% 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