Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$55.14
▼ $0.69 (-1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:00 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$15.94B
Day Range
$54.92 - $57.23
52-Week Range
$31.64 - $57.23
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$40.40
Resistance
$57.23
DT is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+13.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/31 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 22.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $40.50 vs. price $55.14 (-26.5%)
Fair Value
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
60
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $55.14
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
51
Quality
42
Value
33
Momentum
79
Risk
42
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
58
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 Dynatrace, Inc. (DT) has centered on its strong financial performance and investor optimism, particularly following its latest earnings report. Headlines highlight an 8% stock surge since earnings, upward guidance revisions, and comparisons with peers like Datadog and Guidewire. Analysts have upgraded the stock, noting its potential in the expanding AI-driven software market, though broader industry trends and AI-driven growth remain key themes.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Dynatrace, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 15 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
45
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
51
Fundamentals
58
Technical
79
Valuation
33
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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 (3M)
+33%
Market Narrative
80
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+44
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for DT suggests a dominant narrative-reality disconnect, with traders overestimating value (+24% DCF premium) despite neutral momentum metrics (RSI 52). Overconfidence and euphoria scores align with detached optimism, while FOMO remains muted. The key question: *Is the premium justified by future growth, or will reality (EPS growth lagging price gains) force a correction?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:53 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Dynatrace Gaining on Strong Earnings, Raised Guidance"
"Dynatrace Stock Rapidly Approaches Buy Point After Earnings Gap-Up"
"Dynatrace (DT) Price Target Increased by 21.86% to 59.36"
"DT Stocks Hit 52-Week Highs Last Week"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 10D 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
Jesse Livermore — 59/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 4/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological disagreements about risk, valuation, and market timing. Benjamin Graham’s strict defensive criteria and the Enterprising Investor’s looser but still rigorous standards both reject it outright, while Peter Lynch and Jack Schwager’s growth-focused disciplines also dismiss it as lacking clear upside potential. Meanwhile, mid-cycle pragmatists like Samuel Armstrong Nelson and the efficient-market proponents (Malkiel/Bogle) see it as a neutral or unexceptional opportunity, neither compelling enough to deviate from broader strategies nor outright dangerous. The contrast between Walter Bagehot’s ‘adequate but not exceptional’ liquidity assessment and Howard Marks’ late-cycle caution highlights how some methodologies prioritize structural risks (e.g., valuation, market positioning) over technical or qualitative factors, while others like Charles Mackay and Thorstein Veblen flag behavioral red flags—crowd sentiment or speculative overreach—that others overlook.
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 61
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 59
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 56
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 53
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)
🟡 50
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 32
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 32
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
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)
🔴 30
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 29
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 24
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 17
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 16
Cycle looks stretched toward 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)
🔴 13
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 4
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 1 bearish · 3 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
81.6%
Operating Margin
12.2%
Net Margin
8.1%
EBITDA Margin
12.2%
ROE
6.2%
ROA
3.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.54
Cash
$1.10B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.35
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$55.14
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$40.50
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-26.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
20.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 20.3% | $637.46M | $584.82M |
| 2 | 15.9% | $738.72M | $621.77M |
| 3 | 11.4% | $823.11M | $635.59M |
| 4 | 7.0% | $880.42M | $623.71M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $902.43M | $586.52M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$529.68M
Terminal Value
$14.23B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$9.25B
Enterprise Value
$12.30B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$12.30B
*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
$8.60
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$4.08
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 15 positive, 2 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Fintel · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Dynatrace, Inc. (DT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 60/100, 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.
DT currently scores 60/100 (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, DT's estimated fair value is $40.50, which is 26.5% below the current price of $55.14. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DT's technical score is 79/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Free cash flow growth: 22.2%; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $40.50 vs. price $55.14 (-26.5%); SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for DT.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Greifeneder Bernd | Open Market Sale | 5.9.2026 | 58 | -58 | $51.90 |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 116 | -116 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 82 | +82 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 1,422 | -1,422 | $51.90 |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,777 | -3,777 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 4,130 | -4,130 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Open Market Sale | 5.9.2026 | 41 | -41 | $51.90 |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 2,078 | -2,078 | $51.90 |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 2,584 | -2,584 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 116 | +116 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 2,584 | +2,584 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 82 | -82 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,220 | -3,220 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,777 | +3,777 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 2,272 | -2,272 | $51.90 |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 4,130 | +4,130 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,220 | +3,220 | — |
| McMahon Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,982 | +3,982 | — |
| McMahon Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 5,821 | -5,821 | — |
| Greifeneder Bernd | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 1,771 | -1,771 | $51.90 |
| McMahon Stephen A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 2,149 | -2,149 | $51.90 |
| McMahon Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 3,982 | -3,982 | — |
| MCCONNELL RICK M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 9,268 | +9,268 | — |
| MCCONNELL RICK M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.9.2026 | 11,555 | +11,555 | — |
| MCCONNELL RICK M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 5.9.2026 | 5,880 | -5,880 | $51.90 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
12,030,854 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,518,906 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
64.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.6% 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