Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$183.86
▲ $0.77 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:15 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$11.73B
Day Range
$181.30 - $185.85
52-Week Range
$101.00 - $247.49
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$171.40
Resistance
$247.49
DVA is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+41.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/28 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $291.78 vs. price $183.86 (+58.7%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): -114.7% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
75/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
-2.1%
Median 40D Outcome
40/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
33%
+6.7% … +22.5%
🟡 Base
13%
+0.7% … +0.7%
🔴 Bearish
53%
-6.4% … -3.3%
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, 33% (95% CI 15%–58%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -2.6%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
7 occurrence(s) · 29% 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 | 40% (20%–64%) | +0.0% | -4.7% … +3.3% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -1.3% | -5.8% … +6.7% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 33% (15%–58%) | -2.6% | -4.4% … +5.3% | +1.1% |
| 40D | 40% (20%–64%) | -2.1% | -9.6% … +9.7% | +1.7% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -9.6% … +17.1% | +3.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-08 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +7.1% | +15.5% |
| 2019-09-19 | 74/100 | Uptrend | -3.2% | +21.7% |
| 2019-01-23 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +4.0% | -8.3% |
| 2022-09-16 | 72/100 | Consolidation | -3.7% | -19.3% |
| 2019-07-25 | 71/100 | Uptrend | -5.0% | -0.4% |
| 2021-12-17 | 71/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +6.7% | +7.1% |
| 2019-10-31 | 71/100 | Consolidation | +22.5% | +41.8% |
| 2019-08-13 | 70/100 | Uptrend | +0.7% | +18.7% |
| 2022-10-24 | 70/100 | Consolidation | -23.3% | -13.4% |
| 2023-11-10 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +28.9% | +33.5% |
| 2025-09-04 | 69/100 | Downtrend | -2.6% | -11.7% |
| 2025-05-15 | 69/100 | Consolidation | -5.2% | -8.0% |
| 2025-03-21 | 69/100 | Downtrend | -9.9% | -7.9% |
| 2022-08-02 | 68/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.7% | +14.9% |
| 2025-09-23 | 68/100 | Downtrend | -3.3% | -10.8% |
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 XLV (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
| Symbol | Matched date | Similarity | 20D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| OSPN | 2026-06-16 | 53/100 | +9.0% |
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
54
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
34
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
50
Risk
50
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
46
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING DVA...
Recent media coverage of DaVita has centered on its **2025 Community Care Report**, emphasizing its commitment to ethical business practices, accountability, and compliance with regulations. Investors have also reacted to two key developments: an expanded partnership with Humana for chronic kidney disease care and a $15 million settlement following a prior data breach. Despite a recent stock dip, DaVita’s long-term shareholder returns remain strong, reflecting ongoing market interest.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about DaVita. News trend score: 98. Reason: 9 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
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
47
Fundamentals
46
Technical
50
Valuation
62
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price (3M)
-12%
Market Narrative
56
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+16
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peers, as DVA’s modest outperformance (-2.1% vs -2.7%) implies coordinated positioning. FOMO’s mild presence reflects cautious momentum chasing, while low panic/selling scores indicate no distress. The key question is whether this herding persists or reverses if peers diverge further. Narrative-reality alignment (gap: 1) suggests no extreme mispricing narrative is driving behavior. Overconfidence hints at selective optimism, but euphoria remains muted by valuation gaps.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:54 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"agreed to a US$15 million settlement related to a prior data breach"
"expanded its value-based care partnership with Humana for chronic kidney disease patients"
"3 year total shareholder return of 90.54% points to momentum"
"doing the right thing and conducting business activities with the highest standards of ethics"
📈 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
Jack Schwager — 72/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 14/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological disagreements about risk, timing, and valuation. The highest-scoring methodologies—Charles Mackay’s crowd-behavior analysis and Howard Marks’ cycle assessment—suggest it’s a relatively safe bet, with neither mania nor extreme overextension. Meanwhile, disciplined traders like Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (general) see it as a structured opportunity with reasonable risk pricing, while Benjamin Graham’s stricter valuation tests and Philip Fisher’s growth criteria leave it wanting. On the other end, market efficiency skeptics like Malkiel/Bogle and behavioral economists like Veblen and Housel dismiss it outright, either for lacking alpha potential or signaling speculative excess. The contrast underscores whether the stock’s risks are manageable (to cyclical or contrarian investors) or fundamentally flawed (to value purists or volatility-averse holders).
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 72
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 67
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 65
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 58
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 58
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 41
Moderate risk 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
🔴 31
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: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 29
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 28
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 27
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 14
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
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 · 4 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 downtrend 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
15.0%
Net Margin
5.5%
EBITDA Margin
20.2%
ROE
-114.7%
ROA
4.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$10.06
Cash
$676.44M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.29
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$183.86
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$291.78
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+58.7%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
5.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5.5% | $1.38B | $1.27B |
| 2 | 4.8% | $1.45B | $1.22B |
| 3 | 4.0% | $1.51B | $1.16B |
| 4 | 3.3% | $1.56B | $1.10B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.60B | $1.04B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.31B
Terminal Value
$25.16B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$16.35B
Enterprise Value
$22.14B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$22.14B
*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
-$8.58
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$110.93
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 10 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
StockStory · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
DaVita (DVA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
DVA currently scores 54/100 (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, DVA's estimated fair value is $291.78, which is 58.7% above the current price of $183.86. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DVA's technical score is 50/100, 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: $291.78 vs. price $183.86 (+58.7%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Return on equity (ROE): -114.7% (negative); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -8.3%; Free cash flow growth: -10.6%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for DVA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schechter Adam H | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| Pullin Dennis W | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| DESOER BARBARA J | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| YALE PHYLLIS R | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| Hollar Jason M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| Moore Gregory J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| Schoppert Wendy Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| Arway Pamela M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 278 | +278 | — |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 182,980 | -182,980 | $199.55 |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 28,697,229 | -182,980 | $199.55 |
| Rodriguez Javier | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 39,407 | -39,407 | $209.28 |
| Rodriguez Javier | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 840,408 | -39,407 | $209.28 |
| Waters Kathleen Alyce | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 8,950 | -8,950 | $207.84 |
| Waters Kathleen Alyce | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 6,455 | -6,455 | $209.17 |
| Rodriguez Javier | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 30,000 | -30,000 | $209.50 |
| Rodriguez Javier | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 879,815 | -30,000 | $209.50 |
| Waters Kathleen Alyce | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 115,649 | -8,950 | $207.84 |
| Waters Kathleen Alyce | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 109,194 | -6,455 | $209.17 |
| YALE PHYLLIS R | Gift | 26.5.2026 | 5,038 | -5,038 | — |
| YALE PHYLLIS R | Gift | 26.5.2026 | 9,525 | -5,038 | — |
| Moore Gregory J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 250 | +250 | — |
| Schoppert Wendy Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 250 | +250 | — |
| Pullin Dennis W | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 250 | +250 | — |
| DESOER BARBARA J | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 250 | +250 | — |
| YALE PHYLLIS R | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 14,563 | +250 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,675,982 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,284,225 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
79.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 80.5% 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