Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$97.46
▼ $0.69 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:09 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$12.34B
Day Range
$95.80 - $98.50
52-Week Range
$71.59 - $148.19
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$73.10
Resistance
$106.00
GDDY is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-33.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/29 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
🟡 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: $174.60 vs. price $97.46 (+79.2%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.2% of price
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
74/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
+2.1%
Median 40D Outcome
51/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+5.8% … +12.5%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.9% … +0.9%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-8.4% … -2.4%
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, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.5%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
7 occurrence(s) · 71% 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 | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.9% | -0.7% … +3.6% | +0.5% |
| 10D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.6% | -4.7% … +3.9% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +5.5% | -2.8% … +8.4% | +1.2% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.1% | -7.9% … +6.3% | +2.8% |
| 60D | 60% (36%–80%) | +6.6% | -8.3% … +13.4% | +3.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-06-27 | 74/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +5.5% | +7.7% |
| 2017-08-23 | 71/100 | Consolidation | +5.6% | +16.5% |
| 2021-12-06 | 70/100 | Consolidation | +19.7% | +18.8% |
| 2017-07-14 | 70/100 | Consolidation | -1.6% | +4.5% |
| 2019-01-08 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +10.6% | +18.2% |
| 2020-11-12 | 69/100 | Consolidation | +18.1% | +26.5% |
| 2017-08-07 | 69/100 | Consolidation | +5.9% | +9.4% |
| 2019-04-04 | 68/100 | Uptrend | +6.5% | -5.0% |
| 2025-09-24 | 68/100 | Downtrend | -7.6% | -11.6% |
| 2025-12-19 | 68/100 | Consolidation | -18.1% | -34.2% |
| 2021-11-11 | 67/100 | Consolidation | +0.9% | +6.6% |
| 2025-11-07 | 67/100 | Downtrend | -3.6% | -27.2% |
| 2025-06-02 | 67/100 | Consolidation | -2.0% | -18.8% |
| 2025-04-16 | 65/100 | Consolidation | +10.3% | -2.5% |
| 2026-05-26 | 65/100 | Consolidation | -8.6% | +10.3% |
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 XLK (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
58
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
4d ago · $104.47
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -11 to 21 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
4d ago · $104.47
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 2 to 47 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
17d ago · $101.93
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 13 to 38 day-over-day
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
48
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
54
Risk
20
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
61
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING GDDY...
Recent media coverage of GoDaddy has primarily centered on its **2025 Global Stakeholder Impact Report**, highlighting its sustainability efforts and environmental responsibility, particularly in energy and climate change initiatives. Additionally, there was a brief note on an insider selling shares worth over $1.2 million. The focus remains on corporate accountability and operational transparency, with no major product or financial performance updates.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about GoDaddy. News trend score: 86. Reason: 9 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
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
47
Fundamentals
61
Technical
54
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+27%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a **neutral-to-cautious stance** with no single dominant psychological state, as all scores hover below 4. The narrative gap (-9) indicates a slight disconnect between market perception (32) and reality (41), but this is minor. The lack of extreme momentum (-2.2% ROC), muted volatility (0.86x ATR), and neutral RSI (49) imply neither panic nor euphoria. The key question is whether the stock’s underperformance relative to peers (-8.3% vs. -0.6%) reflects sector-specific caution or isolated risk aversion.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:03 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
""We operate with the future in mind. recognizes its responsibility to protect the environment for future generations.""
""GoDaddy Insider Sold Shares Worth $1,267,631, According to a Recent SEC Filing""
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 11D 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 — 73/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological disagreements about risk, valuation, and market psychology. Charles Mackay and Samuel Armstrong Nelson see it as relatively stable—Mackay notes no crowd mania, while Nelson finds it closer to oversold than overbought—but even they rank it mid-tier. Meanwhile, Fisher and Marks acknowledge its solid fundamentals but warn of inflated expectations or mediocre quality, splitting the difference between cautious optimism and guarded skepticism. At the other end, Graham, Lynch, and Loeb dismiss it outright, with Graham and Lynch rejecting its growth or defensive metrics entirely, while Loeb and Bagehot flag extreme risks—whether volatility or liquidity—that would disqualify it under their strictures. The contrast underscores how some frameworks prioritize cyclical timing (Nelson) or trend clarity (Livermore), while others demand ironclad fundamentals (Graham) or statistical safety nets (Loeb), leaving little room for compromise.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 73
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)
🟢 66
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 65
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 61
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 52
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 41
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 36
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 26
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)
🔴 25
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 10
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
🔴 10
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 2
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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 · 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 uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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
22.8%
Net Margin
17.7%
EBITDA Margin
25.1%
ROE
406.8%
ROA
10.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.34
Cash
$1.08B
Total Debt
$3.78B
Current Ratio
0.61
Debt/Equity
17.57
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$97.46
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$174.60
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+79.2%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
6.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.6% | $1.68B | $1.54B |
| 2 | 5.6% | $1.77B | $1.49B |
| 3 | 4.5% | $1.85B | $1.43B |
| 4 | 3.5% | $1.92B | $1.36B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.97B | $1.28B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.58B
Terminal Value
$31.01B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$20.15B
Enterprise Value
$27.25B
Net Debt
$2.70B
Equity Value
$24.55B
*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
$1.53
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$31.32
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 8 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
StockStory · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 10.9.2026
ChartMill · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 8.9.2026
GoDaddy (GDDY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, 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.
GDDY currently scores 58/100 (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, GDDY's estimated fair value is $174.60, which is 79.2% above the current price of $97.46. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
GDDY's technical score is 54/100, 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: $174.60 vs. price $97.46 (+79.2%); Free cash flow growth: 24.9%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.2% of price; Current ratio: 0.61; Calmar: 0.14 (3y annualized return 9.1% / max drawdown 65.0%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for GDDY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 20 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McCaffrey Mark | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 3,873 | -3,873 | $101.19 |
| Palitwanon Phontip | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 530 | -530 | $101.19 |
| McCaffrey Mark | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,000 | -2,000 | $100.37 |
| Bhutani Amanpal Singh | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 8,194 | -8,194 | $101.19 |
| Sine Jared F. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,163 | -1,163 | $101.19 |
| Zarmi Sigal | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 350 | -350 | $97.44 |
| Sine Jared F. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | $101.92 |
| Bhutani Amanpal Singh | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 4,500 | -4,500 | $97.44 |
| Sweet Leah | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 325 | -325 | $97.44 |
| Sweet Leah | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 325 | -325 | $97.37 |
| Palitwanon Phontip | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 2,073 | -2,073 | $91.82 |
| Palitwanon Phontip | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 188 | -188 | $91.70 |
| Palitwanon Phontip | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 17,922 | -2,073 | $91.82 |
| Palitwanon Phontip | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 17,734 | -188 | $91.70 |
| Bhutani Amanpal Singh | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 4,500 | -4,500 | $83.15 |
| Bhutani Amanpal Singh | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 517,247 | -4,500 | $83.15 |
| Sine Jared F. | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 644 | -644 | $87.53 |
| Sine Jared F. | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 75,971 | -644 | $87.53 |
| McCaffrey Mark | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 3,500 | -3,500 | $82.92 |
| McCaffrey Mark | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 105,728 | -3,500 | $82.92 |
| Tallapragada Srinivas | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,925 | +2,925 | — |
| SHARPLES BRIAN | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 3,843 | +3,843 | — |
| Chen Herald Y | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,925 | +2,925 | — |
| GARRETT MARK | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,925 | +2,925 | — |
| Sweet Leah | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,925 | +2,925 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,958,702 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 5,156,052 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 69.1% 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