Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$172.02
▲ $2.22 (+1.3%)
Market data updated: 09/15 11:38 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$26.40B
Day Range
$170.64 - $173.20
52-Week Range
$150.00 - $194.81
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
CINF is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+9.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/26 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $504.35 vs. price $172.02 (+193.2%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
87/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+3.7%
Median 40D Outcome
81/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+2.3% … +5.8%
🟡 Base
27%
+0.8% … +0.9%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-5.5% … -1.8%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 40 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.9%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
9 occurrence(s) · 44% historical success
Echo #2 — 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 | 33% (15%–58%) | +0.6% | -3.3% … +2.8% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | +0.8% | -3.7% … +1.8% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.9% | -0.2% … +2.4% | +0.9% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +3.7% | -2.0% … +7.5% | +2.1% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +4.8% | +0.2% … +8.3% | +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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-02-03 | 87/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -6.2% | -33.8% |
| 2018-04-25 | 86/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.3% | -5.5% |
| 2018-06-08 | 84/100 | Consolidation | -2.1% | +8.3% |
| 2020-01-15 | 84/100 | Consolidation | +9.0% | -21.6% |
| 2025-08-28 | 83/100 | Uptrend | +2.3% | +8.2% |
| 2025-07-10 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +2.4% | +10.4% |
| 2026-03-17 | 83/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.1% | +2.1% |
| 2026-05-14 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +2.2% | +4.8% |
| 2025-08-12 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +0.6% | +5.7% |
| 2024-07-08 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +7.8% | +17.7% |
| 2025-09-15 | 81/100 | Uptrend | +1.8% | +4.1% |
| 2026-04-27 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +0.8% | +8.3% |
| 2026-01-14 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +0.9% | +0.0% |
| 2025-09-29 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +0.8% | +6.0% |
| 2026-02-02 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +3.7% | +0.5% |
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
61
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 23, 2026
Then
52
$168.29
Now
61
$172.02
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
55
Value
67
Momentum
48
Risk
64
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
64
Institutional
50
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING CINF...
Recent media coverage of Cincinnati Financial (CINF) has highlighted its strong dividend performance, with recurring focus on its **consistent dividend growth**—notably a recent 8% increase—**long-standing reliability** (66 consecutive years of raises), and its appeal to income investors. The company’s **specialty property and casualty insurance diversification** and **excess capital generation** were also praised as key growth drivers. Additionally, headlines mentioned a **high-profile executive retirement** (chief claims officer in January 2027) and a **director’s significant stock purchase**, signaling confidence in the company’s valuation.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Cincinnati Financial. News trend score: 74. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 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
60
Fundamentals
64
Technical
48
Valuation
67
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).
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.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
41
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixating on the 2.6% support level, likely due to its proximity. Herding is muted despite peer comparisons, while FOMO and euphoria are dampened by weak momentum and valuation disconnects. The key question is whether traders will hold or exit near support, given the narrative-reality gap remains narrow. Overconfidence is minimal, and loss aversion is absent, implying no extreme defensive positioning. The open question: Will traders break support or hold near the anchor point?
Updated: 09/08/2026, 08:05 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Cincinnati Financial increased its quarterly payout to $0.94 per share... With 66 consecutive years of dividend increases"
"Cincinnati Financial passes the Best Dividend screen with a 7 rating, 2.92% yield, low payout, and decade-long dividend stability"
"Director Debbink purchased shares at $171.64 each... bringing his indirect holdings to 62,059 shares worth $10.64 million"
"Financial stocks that kept raising dividends through both the 2008 meltdown and the 2020 shock"
📈 7D 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 — 89/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The divergence in verdicts for CINF reflects stark contrasts between methodologies prioritizing fundamental stability and those demanding exceptional growth or market inefficiency. Defensive investors like Benjamin Graham and Morgan Housel—who favor steady, undervalued businesses with durable competitive advantages—score this stock highly, seeing it as a patient-holder’s quiet compounder. Meanwhile, more speculative or market-cycle-sensitive approaches, such as those of Jesse Livermore or Peter Lynch, dismiss it outright, either due to lack of clear momentum or failure to meet aggressive growth thresholds. Even within Graham’s own framework, the Defensive Investor’s strict valuation standards contrast sharply with the Enterprising Investor’s more lenient (but still critical) perspective, illustrating how tolerance for risk and valuation flexibility can swing conclusions. The middle-ground methodologies—like Howard Marks’ cycle-aware approach or Philip Fisher’s quality focus—land in the cautious ‘maybe,’ highlighting CINF’s mediocre fit for investors who demand either exceptional traits or precise timing.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 89
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 89
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 86
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 81
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 76
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 75
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 59
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 57
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 56
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
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)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 49
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 48
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 41
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 39
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
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
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 · 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 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
18.9%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
15.0%
ROA
5.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$15.32
Cash
$1.43B
Total Debt
$790.00M
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.05
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 23.6.2026 | $0.940 |
| 22.6.2026 | $0.940 |
| 24.3.2026 | $0.940 |
| 23.3.2026 | $0.940 |
| 22.12.2025 | $0.870 |
| 21.12.2025 | $0.870 |
| 22.9.2025 | $0.870 |
| 21.9.2025 | $0.870 |
| 23.6.2025 | $0.870 |
| 22.6.2025 | $0.870 |
| 24.3.2025 | $0.870 |
| 23.3.2025 | $0.870 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$172.02
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$504.35
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+193.2%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $3.87B | $3.55B |
| 2 | 19.4% | $4.61B | $3.88B |
| 3 | 13.8% | $5.25B | $4.05B |
| 4 | 8.1% | $5.67B | $4.02B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $5.82B | $3.78B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$3.09B
Terminal Value
$91.72B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$59.61B
Enterprise Value
$78.90B
Net Debt
$-641.00M
Equity Value
$79.54B
*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
$100.89
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$100.89
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 12 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
PR Newswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 31.8.2026
Motley Fool · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 27.8.2026
Cincinnati Financial (CINF) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 61/100, 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.
CINF currently scores 61/100 (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, CINF's estimated fair value is $504.35, which is 193.2% above the current price of $172.02. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CINF'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: Estimated fair value: $504.35 vs. price $172.02 (+193.2%); ATR: 1.8% of price; Debt/equity: 0.05.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; -0.8% over the last 3 months relative to the index; ROC 12 days: -0.2%.
Yes — CINF 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 — 2 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debbink Dirk J | Open Market Purchase | 25.8.2026 | 62,059 | +1,000 | $171.64 |
| Debbink Dirk J | Open Market Purchase | 25.8.2026 | 1,000 | +1,000 | $171.64 |
| Schiff Charles Odell | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 7,600 | -7,600 | $175.40 |
| Schiff Charles Odell | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 173,455 | -7,600 | $175.40 |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 24,221 | -24,221 | — |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 24,221 | +24,221 | $85.67 |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.6.2026 | 17,536 | -17,536 | $163.73 |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 144,588 | +24,221 | $85.67 |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.6.2026 | 127,052 | -17,536 | $163.73 |
| KELLINGTON JOHN S | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 0 | -24,221 | — |
| Fu Luyang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.5.2026 | 774 | -774 | — |
| Fu Luyang | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.5.2026 | 99 | -99 | $161.20 |
| Fu Luyang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.5.2026 | 774 | +774 | $85.67 |
| Fu Luyang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.5.2026 | 11,444 | +774 | $85.67 |
| Fu Luyang | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.5.2026 | 11,345 | -99 | $161.20 |
| Fu Luyang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.5.2026 | 0 | -774 | — |
| Schiff Charles Odell | Other Transaction | 11.5.2026 | 27,122 | -27,122 | — |
| Schiff Charles Odell | Other Transaction | 11.5.2026 | 122,911 | -27,122 | — |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.5.2026 | 487 | -487 | — |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.5.2026 | 957 | -957 | — |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Tax Withholding in Shares | 7.5.2026 | 145 | -145 | $160.96 |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Tax Withholding in Shares | 7.5.2026 | 74 | -74 | $160.96 |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.5.2026 | 487 | +487 | $70.70 |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.5.2026 | 957 | +957 | $71.19 |
| Hogan Thomas Christopher | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.5.2026 | 18,438 | +957 | $71.19 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,616,215 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,696,781 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
71.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 71.8% 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