Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$192.94
▼ $1.62 (-0.8%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:24 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$192.38 - $195.98
52-Week Range
$143.30 - $285.50
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$166.58
Resistance
$238.83
DASH is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-28.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 27.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $126.16 vs. price $192.94 (-34.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (76/100), 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.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+5.5%
Median 40D Outcome
21/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+15.1% … +27.8%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.3% … +0.3%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-13.6% … -6.5%
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, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +3.4%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
2 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
1 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%) | +2.5% | +0.2% … +8.0% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.6% | -1.2% … +8.6% | +1.0% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +3.4% | -6.8% … +17.6% | +1.9% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +5.5% | -7.3% … +28.4% | +5.5% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +20.0% | -2.3% … +42.3% | +5.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-20 | 80/100 | Downtrend | -15.7% | -12.8% |
| 2023-08-21 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.4% | +22.3% |
| 2023-04-27 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +13.8% | +46.2% |
| 2026-02-04 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -6.3% | -10.2% |
| 2024-07-18 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +29.9% | +49.0% |
| 2026-05-26 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +15.5% | +44.4% |
| 2023-10-05 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +18.9% | +30.7% |
| 2023-10-27 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +33.0% | +52.2% |
| 2021-11-08 | 73/100 | Consolidation | -15.4% | -52.2% |
| 2025-11-04 | 73/100 | Consolidation | -7.3% | -13.4% |
| 2024-05-23 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +0.3% | +15.5% |
| 2025-03-07 | 70/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -8.4% | +20.0% |
| 2024-05-09 | 70/100 | Consolidation | -2.5% | +5.6% |
| 2026-03-26 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +16.3% | +12.9% |
| 2026-06-10 | 69/100 | Downtrend | +27.0% | +40.2% |
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 XLY (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
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
17d ago · $226.38
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
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.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
76
Quality
58
Value
33
Momentum
29
Risk
50
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
45
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING DASH...
Recent media coverage of DoorDash has primarily highlighted its financial growth and strategic partnerships. The company reported a **36% year-over-year revenue increase in Q2 2026**, reaching $4.45 billion, with strong performance from its **DashPass subscription service**. Additionally, DoorDash expanded its delivery network through a **collaboration with SKIMS**, focusing on on-demand fashion and lifestyle products. While broader market trends and investor activity were noted, DoorDash’s focus remains on scaling its delivery ecosystem and subscription-driven revenue.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about DoorDash. 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
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
45
Technical
29
Valuation
33
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+24
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are following peers rather than independent analysis, given DASH’s outsized decline relative to its sector. The narrative gap (64 vs. 41) hints at a disconnect where optimism (euphoria, overconfidence) persists despite weak momentum and valuation mispricing. Key open questions include whether the stock’s valuation premium (+59% DCF) will attract further herding or if momentum deterioration will force a re-evaluation. The lack of panic or FOMO signals suggests a cautious, consensus-driven environment.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:53 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"DoorDash's Q2 revenue surged 36% year-over-year to $4.45B, beating expectations"
"Why Is DoorDash (DASH) Up 4.1% Since Last Earnings Report?"
📈 18D 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
Peter Lynch — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 5/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for DASH reflects deep contrasts in how these methodologies prioritize growth, risk, and valuation. Peter Lynch and Samuel Armstrong Nelson see strong upside potential—Lynch highlights untapped growth while Nelson flags a favorable cycle position—but their optimism contrasts sharply with Benjamin Graham’s near-total rejection, which dismisses it as too risky and statistically overpriced. Meanwhile, Fisher and Smith acknowledge solid qualities but stop short of full endorsement, while Livermore and Marks (both cycle/valuation-focused) remain neutral or cautious, wary of hidden risks or lack of clear momentum. The middle-ground approaches (like Schwager or Malkiel/Bogle) struggle to find decisive evidence either way, underscoring how this stock’s volatility and speculative traits clash with disciplined, long-term frameworks.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 96
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 95
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 60
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 60
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 56
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 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)
🟡 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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 39
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 38
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 33
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 32
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 19
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)
🔴 5
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 (2 bullish · 9 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 uptrend 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
—
Operating Margin
5.3%
Net Margin
6.8%
EBITDA Margin
10.7%
ROE
9.3%
ROA
4.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.19
Cash
$4.38B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.41
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$192.94
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$126.16
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-34.6%
🔴 Appears expensive 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% | $2.72B | $2.49B |
| 2 | 19.4% | $3.24B | $2.73B |
| 3 | 13.8% | $3.69B | $2.85B |
| 4 | 8.1% | $3.99B | $2.83B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $4.09B | $2.66B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$2.17B
Terminal Value
$64.49B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$41.91B
Enterprise Value
$55.47B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$55.47B
*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
$22.82
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.13
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 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
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
DoorDash (DASH) 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.
DASH 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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, DASH's estimated fair value is $126.16, which is 34.6% below the current price of $192.94. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DASH's technical score is 29/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 27.9%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 634.5%; Net income growth: 660.2%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $126.16 vs. price $192.94 (-34.6%); Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for DASH.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 17 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee Gordon S | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 413 | -413 | $221.50 |
| Xu Tony | Other Transaction | 3.9.2026 | 31,428 | +31,428 | — |
| Xu Tony | Other Transaction | 3.9.2026 | 31,428 | -31,428 | — |
| Tang Stanley | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,500 | -2,500 | $223.60 |
| Tang Stanley | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,271 | -2,271 | $227.23 |
| Tang Stanley | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,265 | -2,265 | $224.51 |
| Tang Stanley | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 15,522 | -15,522 | $226.52 |
| Tang Stanley | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 8,277 | -8,277 | $225.75 |
| Tang Stanley | Other Transaction | 2.9.2026 | 30,835 | +30,835 | — |
| Tang Stanley | Other Transaction | 2.9.2026 | 30,835 | -30,835 | — |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,353 | -3,353 | $228.88 |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,117 | -3,117 | $230.01 |
| Xu Tony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 16,667 | +16,667 | $7.16 |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 1,700 | -1,700 | $226.81 |
| Fang Andy | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,900 | -3,900 | $228.82 |
| Fang Andy | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 2,552 | -2,552 | $227.92 |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 2,827 | -2,827 | $225.83 |
| Xu Tony | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 16,667 | -16,667 | $230.00 |
| Fang Andy | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 500 | -500 | $232.23 |
| Fang Andy | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 1,417 | -1,417 | $230.82 |
| Xu Tony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 16,667 | -16,667 | — |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 2,647 | -2,647 | $228.02 |
| Inukonda Ravi | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 600 | -600 | $232.20 |
| Inukonda Ravi | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 1,017 | -1,017 | — |
| Fang Andy | Other Transaction | 1.9.2026 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,224,246 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 18,087,013 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
57.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.2% 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