Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$131.77
▼ $0.93 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 06:17 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$230.51B
Day Range
$131.54 - $133.13
52-Week Range
$93.66 - $147.96
Beta
—
Next Earnings
13.10.2026
Support
$126.78
Resistance
$144.29
C is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+28.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/26 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is above the 200-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$658.68 vs. price $131.77 (-599.9%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
83/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+6.4%
Median 40D Outcome
60/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
73%
+4.8% … +12.5%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
27%
-5.6% … -2.4%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 73% (95% CI 48%–89%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.1%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
7 occurrence(s) · 100% historical success
Echo #2 — Momentum Breakout
2 occurrence(s) · 0% 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 | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.8% | -1.7% … +3.8% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.7% | -1.1% … +6.3% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.1% | +0.3% … +10.9% | +1.0% |
| 40D | 67% (42%–85%) | +6.4% | -0.4% … +14.7% | +2.6% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +12.2% | -1.0% … +20.1% | +2.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-09-09 | 83/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +5.1% | +20.0% |
| 2024-10-21 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +11.6% | +29.4% |
| 2018-10-15 | 79/100 | Downtrend | -7.2% | -18.1% |
| 2024-04-15 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +8.3% | +12.2% |
| 2018-02-07 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.2% | -9.4% |
| 2019-10-02 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +10.1% | +20.2% |
| 2019-05-09 | 77/100 | Uptrend | -2.9% | -3.6% |
| 2025-11-18 | 76/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +13.4% | +15.7% |
| 2024-01-18 | 75/100 | Uptrend | +8.0% | +14.6% |
| 2026-03-30 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +19.8% | +35.2% |
| 2023-06-26 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +1.8% | -8.5% |
| 2023-04-26 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -5.1% | +1.7% |
| 2025-10-02 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +3.0% | +21.4% |
| 2024-12-19 | 74/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +19.4% | +5.0% |
| 2026-05-04 | 72/100 | Uptrend | +4.5% | +5.3% |
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
43
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 22, 2026
Then
43
$131.65
Now
43
$131.77
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
56
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
26
Risk
44
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
47
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING C...
Recent media coverage of Citigroup highlights its expanding role in digital and cross-border payments, particularly through partnerships with DBS Bank to launch 24/7 tokenized dollar transactions on SWIFT’s blockchain platform, enabling faster, round-the-clock international transfers. The bank also appears in broader market commentary on sector trends, including upgrades in U.S. earnings and strategic shifts in trucking and chip stocks, though no direct Citigroup-specific developments are detailed beyond these collaborations.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Citigroup. News trend score: 56. Reason: 5 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
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
47
Technical
26
Valuation
38
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
Price (3M)
-8%
Market Narrative
46
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests traders are fixated on a near-term resistance level (2.3% below), consistent with anchoring. While FOMO and herding are present, the dominant bias appears to be anchoring, as momentum and sentiment alone don’t fully justify the price. The narrative gap (60 vs. 38) hints at a disconnect between optimistic expectations and fundamentals, but the key question remains: will traders break resistance or hold firm? Overconfidence in price momentum vs. earnings growth could amplify either move.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:22 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Citigroup (C) Moves Deeper Into China’s Capital Markets as Competition Intensifies"
"DBS and Citi Bring 24/7 Tokenized Dollar Payments to SWIFT’s Blockchain Ledger"
📈 17D 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 — 91/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 16/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with scores ranging from a cautious 65—where Thorstein Veblen sees growth aligned with real value—to a resounding 0, where Walter Bagehot finds no basis for analysis. The middle ground is fractured: while Charles Mackay and the efficient-market proponents (Malkiel/Bogle) detect mild speculative momentum, others like Jesse Livermore and Peter Lynch see it as a murky case—growth exists but may already be priced in. Meanwhile, value-focused investors like Graham and Marks flag valuation risks, with Marks’ cycle analysis painting it as late-stage, while Fisher and Schwager dismiss it outright for lacking the signature traits of their preferred stocks. The contrast underscores whether this stock is a niche growth play (Veblen) or a speculative bubble (Nelson/Bagehot), with no clear consensus.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 91
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)
🟢 89
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 65
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 58
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 53
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
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 47
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 43
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 42
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 36
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 36
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 24
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 16
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
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: 25%
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 · 8 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$126.78
Range Bottom
$144.29
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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
16.8%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.7%
ROA
0.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.11
Cash
$349.58B
Total Debt
$367.70B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
1.73
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 3.8.2026 | $0.670 |
| 2.8.2026 | $0.670 |
| 4.5.2026 | $0.600 |
| 3.5.2026 | $0.600 |
| 2.2.2026 | $0.600 |
| 1.2.2026 | $0.600 |
| 3.11.2025 | $0.600 |
| 2.11.2025 | $0.600 |
| 4.8.2025 | $0.600 |
| 3.8.2025 | $0.600 |
| 5.5.2025 | $0.560 |
| 4.5.2025 | $0.560 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$131.77
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$658.68
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-599.9%
🔴 Appears expensive 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% | $-77.27B | $-70.89B |
| 2 | 3.8% | $-80.18B | $-67.49B |
| 3 | 3.4% | $-82.87B | $-63.99B |
| 4 | 2.9% | $-85.29B | $-60.42B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-87.43B | $-56.82B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-74.15B
Terminal Value
$-1.38T
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-896.03B
Enterprise Value
$-1.22T
Net Debt
$18.13B
Equity Value
$-1.23T
*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
$113.34
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$100.85
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 11 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Citigroup (C) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
C currently scores 43/100 (Weak) 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, C's estimated fair value is -$658.68, which is 599.9% below the current price of $131.77. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
C's technical score is 26/100, 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: Price is above the 200-day average; Net margin: 16.8% — strong; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 17.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$658.68 vs. price $131.77 (-599.9%); Free cash flow growth: -183.4%; Debt/equity: 1.73.
Yes — C 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dailey Grace E | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| COLE TITILOPE | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| HENNES DUNCAN P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| TAYLOR DIANA L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| DUGAN JOHN CUNNINGHAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 438.424 | +438.424 | $142.56 |
| Turley James S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 165.335 | +165.335 | $142.56 |
| COLE TITILOPE | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 8.204 | +8.204 | $142.56 |
| HENNES DUNCAN P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 165.335 | +165.335 | $142.56 |
| von Koskull Casper Wilhelm | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| MOULDS JONATHAN PAUL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 9.504 | +9.504 | $142.56 |
| REINER GARY M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 385 | +385 | $142.56 |
| MOULDS JONATHAN PAUL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 222.183 | +222.183 | $142.56 |
| James Renee Jo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| MOULDS JONATHAN PAUL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 3.445 | +3.445 | $142.56 |
| Turley James S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 5.343 | +5.343 | $142.56 |
| von Koskull Casper Wilhelm | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 22.314 | +22.314 | $142.56 |
| James Renee Jo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 131.541 | +131.541 | $142.56 |
| TAYLOR DIANA L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 253.527 | +253.527 | $142.56 |
| REINER GARY M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 49,731 | +385 | $142.56 |
| TAYLOR DIANA L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,275 | +5 | $142.56 |
| TAYLOR DIANA L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 60,490 | +254 | $142.56 |
| James Renee Jo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,275 | +5 | $142.56 |
| James Renee Jo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 31,385 | +132 | $142.56 |
| HENNES DUNCAN P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,687 | +5 | $142.56 |
| HENNES DUNCAN P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 39,448 | +165 | $142.56 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
26,196,181 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 24,686,076 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 39.2% 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