Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$47.57
▲ $0.00 (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 11:21 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$4.06B
Day Range
$46.02 - $47.94
52-Week Range
$31.41 - $57.21
Beta
—
Next Earnings
05.11.2026
Support
$40.75
Resistance
$52.60
BILL is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-9.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/31 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $79.71 vs. price $47.57 (+67.6%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -4.4% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
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
56
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 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.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
48
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
58
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
35
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of **BILL Holdings, Inc.** has focused on its stock valuation and market perception amid a steep decline—its shares have fallen roughly **84% over five years**, yet analysts still view it as undervalued relative to intrinsic value metrics. The company’s participation in the **Goldman Sachs Communacopia + Technology Conference** (September 10, 2026) signals investor interest, while comparisons to peers in the finance and HR software sector highlight its position in the market. Some headlines also briefly mention BILL alongside other high-performing stocks, though broader industry trends (like cloud margins or AI investments) dominate adjacent discussions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about BILL Holdings, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
16
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
35
Technical
58
Valuation
62
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+47%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+11
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a **euphoric** state driven by strong momentum (+3.0% ROC) and extreme valuation disconnect (-40% vs. DCF), despite neutral RSI (53) and moderate FOMO. Investors may be overestimating growth potential while ignoring fundamental gaps, consistent with overconfidence. The key question is whether this disconnect persists or if sentiment cools as the narrative-reality gap widens. No dominant bias dominates, but euphoria’s high score hints at potential complacency.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:19 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"BILL Holdings has had a very weak share price record... yet the current checks on its intrinsic value and market multiples both point to a stock that screens as cheap"
"Stocks like PRAA, CNC, BILL and PARR are seeing price strength, and the momentum is likely to continue"
"Truist Securities analyst raises BILL Holdings price target from $44 to $52"
📈 12D 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
Benjamin Graham — 77/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 21/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for BILL reflects deep methodological differences in valuation, risk tolerance, and market timing. Benjamin Graham’s *defensive* approach sees it as an attractive bargain—likely due to strong fundamentals and a wide margin of safety—but his *enterprising* bar is far stricter, dismissing it as merely a modest discount. Meanwhile, growth-focused investors like Peter Lynch and Jack Schwager reject it outright, with Lynch citing insufficient growth potential and Schwager’s disciplined wizards spotting no clear technical setup. Cyclical and speculative-minded strategists, such as Samuel Nelson and Thorstein Veblen, warn of overvaluation or speculative excess, while more pragmatic voices like Howard Marks and Walter Bagehot acknowledge its merits but caution against inflated expectations or liquidity constraints. The consensus leans toward moderate interest for patient, value-oriented investors, but the extremes—from Graham’s enthusiasm to Veblen’s dismissal—highlight how subjective criteria shape vastly different conclusions.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 77
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 75
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 68
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 56
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 54
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 52
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 52
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 49
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 42
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)
🟡 40
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 21
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
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (5 bullish · 4 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.
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
80.9%
Operating Margin
-4.4%
Net Margin
-0.7%
EBITDA Margin
-1.1%
ROE
-0.3%
ROA
-0.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.11
Cash
$1.03B
Total Debt
$1.84B
Current Ratio
1.51
Debt/Equity
0.52
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$47.57
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$79.71
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+67.6%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
16.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.1% | $478.89M | $439.35M |
| 2 | 12.7% | $539.69M | $454.24M |
| 3 | 9.3% | $589.86M | $455.48M |
| 4 | 5.9% | $624.66M | $442.52M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $640.28M | $416.14M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$412.50M
Terminal Value
$10.10B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$6.56B
Enterprise Value
$8.77B
Net Debt
$805.07M
Equity Value
$7.96B
*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
$35.33
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.73
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Trefis · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Zacks · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Trefis · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
BILL Holdings, Inc. (BILL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 56/100, 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.
BILL currently scores 56/100 (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, BILL's estimated fair value is $79.71, which is 67.6% above the current price of $47.57. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BILL's technical score is 58/100, 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: $79.71 vs. price $47.57 (+67.6%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 1.51.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -4.4% (negative); Net margin: -0.7% (negative); ATR: 4.1% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BILL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 13 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 10,970 | -10,970 | $49.86 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 10,154 | -10,154 | $50.50 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 15,372 | -15,372 | $50.01 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 5,752 | -5,752 | $50.62 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 10,636 | -10,636 | $48.01 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 11,765 | -11,765 | $48.01 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 26,974 | -26,974 | $48.59 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 100,899 | -100,899 | $48.59 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 24,364 | -24,364 | $48.59 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 40,357 | -40,357 | $48.00 |
| Jain Rohini | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,915 | -3,915 | $48.70 |
| Jain Rohini | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 29,555 | -29,555 | $47.80 |
| Cieri Michael | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 10,754 | -10,754 | $49.13 |
| Cieri Michael | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.8.2026 | 8,674 | -8,674 | $50.31 |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 6,661 | -6,661 | — |
| Jain Rohini | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 11,755 | -11,755 | — |
| Cieri Michael | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 6,531 | -6,531 | — |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 5,359 | -5,359 | — |
| Cieri Michael | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 12,897 | -12,897 | — |
| Jain Rohini | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 50,315 | +50,315 | — |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 7,300 | -7,300 | — |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 8,310 | -8,310 | — |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 17,632 | -17,632 | — |
| Jain Rohini | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 11,755 | +11,755 | — |
| Lacerte Rene A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.8.2026 | 24,896 | -24,896 | $50.31 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
11,285,945 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,246,952 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.0% 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