Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Energy · ·
$33.64
▼ $0.39 (-1.1%)
Market data updated: 09/19 05:08 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$28.03B
Day Range
$33.58 - $33.96
52-Week Range
$21.46 - $43.59
Beta
—
Next Earnings
19.10.2026
Support
$30.98
Resistance
$38.06
HAL is a stock from the Energy sector — Oil, gas, and renewable energy — highly volatile profitability, dependent on global commodity prices.
+50.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/26 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.12 (3y annualized return -6.7% / max drawdown 55.5%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
85/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+11.4%
Median 40D Outcome
0/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
80%
+7.0% … +16.7%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.2% … +0.2%
🔴 Bearish
13%
-10.7% … -7.5%
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, 80% (95% CI 55%–93%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +8.2%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
2 occurrence(s) · 50% historical success
Echo #2 — Trend Acceleration
6 occurrence(s) · 83% 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 | 80% (55%–93%) | +4.9% | +2.0% … +7.9% | +1.0% |
| 10D | 73% (48%–89%) | +7.3% | +1.4% … +14.8% | +2.3% |
| 20D | 80% (55%–93%) | +8.2% | +3.4% … +13.8% | +5.3% |
| 40D | 80% (55%–93%) | +11.4% | +3.8% … +26.9% | +9.7% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +16.3% | -3.8% … +31.5% | +18.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1973-03-23 | 85/100 | Consolidation | +327.3% | +418.9% |
| 2026-06-23 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -5.9% | -3.1% |
| 2026-04-20 | 77/100 | Consolidation | +16.6% | -4.5% |
| 2026-05-29 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -12.3% | -13.0% |
| 2025-10-16 | 73/100 | Consolidation | +23.8% | +49.5% |
| 2026-05-07 | 71/100 | Uptrend | +0.2% | -17.3% |
| 2025-11-20 | 68/100 | Uptrend | +8.2% | +38.1% |
| 2026-03-16 | 67/100 | Consolidation | +9.8% | +16.3% |
| 2026-04-06 | 62/100 | Uptrend | +11.0% | -12.7% |
| 2026-02-17 | 62/100 | Uptrend | +5.7% | +21.7% |
| 2025-12-18 | 60/100 | Uptrend | +16.8% | +31.9% |
| 2025-09-15 | 60/100 | Uptrend | +3.3% | +31.2% |
| 2025-10-02 | 56/100 | Uptrend | +10.6% | +15.5% |
| 2026-02-02 | 56/100 | Uptrend | +7.4% | +27.4% |
| 2026-01-16 | 48/100 | Uptrend | +3.5% | +15.3% |
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 XLE (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
47
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
38
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
13
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
63
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING HAL...
Recent media coverage of Halliburton highlights its stock performance amid broader energy sector trends, with the company’s shares rising **2.26%** in late August, outperforming the market. Analysts at Barclays emphasized a **$3.6 trillion annual investment need** in energy by 2027 due to AI, electrification, and geopolitical risks, positioning Halliburton as a beneficiary of growing demand. Additionally, speculation about U.S. oil ventures in Venezuela—linked to supply chain security—suggests potential gains for Halliburton alongside peers like Chevron and ExxonMobil. A single insider sale of shares worth **$929,138** was also noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Halliburton. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
40
Fundamentals
63
Technical
13
Valuation
50
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-4%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
HAL’s psychology is dominated by **confirmation bias** (36) and **anchoring** (32), reflecting a disconnect between bullish narratives and weakening fundamentals. The **narrative gap of +28**—where optimism (68) far exceeds reality (40)—suggests traders selectively embrace positive signals while ignoring deteriorating margins and flat revenue. **FOMO (32)** lingers due to momentum and sentiment, but the lack of peer alignment (herding score: 0) hints at selective participation. The key question: will traders double down on the narrative or pivot as fundamentals worsen?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:50 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Halliburton (HAL) closed at $37.63... marking a +2.26% move from the prior day."
"U.S. pursuit of a stake in Venezuelan oil rights... could benefit Halliburton, whose recent earnings and stock gains reflect this energy shift."
"Chevron, Exxon, and Halliburton are reacting... as traders try to figure out which story actually matters for their portfolios."
"Halliburton Insider Sold Shares Worth $929,138, According to a Recent SEC Filing"
📈 14D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between cautious optimism and outright skepticism about HAL, reflecting stark differences in their core principles. The highest-scoring approaches—like Walter Bagehot’s liquidity focus and Edgar Lawrence Smith’s long-term framework—still flag only ‘adequate’ conditions, suggesting the stock might be viable for traders or investors with patience but lacking the ‘exceptional’ edge they’d seek. Meanwhile, the more conservative voices, such as Benjamin Graham (both Defensive and Enterprising) and Jack Schwager’s disciplined wizards, dismiss it outright, with Graham calling it statistically unappealing and Schwager’s model seeing no disciplined setup. At the other extreme, Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle analysis and Thorstein Veblen’s institutional critique paint a far more alarming picture, warning of overbought conditions or growth pursued for its own sake—hardly the kind of stock Veblen or Nelson would tolerate. Even the efficient-market camp and Howard Marks’ mixed verdicts imply the stock’s case is weak, while Peter Lynch and Morgan Housel acknowledge potential but temper it with the reality that the price already embeds much of its perceived value.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 60
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 52
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 52
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 45
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 43
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 41
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 39
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 30
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 28
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 13
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
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 (0 bullish · 10 bearish · 1 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.
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
10.2%
Net Margin
5.8%
EBITDA Margin
15.3%
ROE
12.3%
ROA
5.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$2.21B
Total Debt
$7.16B
Current Ratio
2.04
Debt/Equity
0.68
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 2.9.2026 | $0.170 |
| 3.6.2026 | $0.170 |
| 2.6.2026 | $0.170 |
| 4.3.2026 | $0.170 |
| 3.3.2026 | $0.170 |
| 3.12.2025 | $0.170 |
| 2.12.2025 | $0.170 |
| 3.9.2025 | $0.170 |
| 2.9.2025 | $0.170 |
| 4.6.2025 | $0.170 |
| 3.6.2025 | $0.170 |
| 5.3.2025 | $0.170 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$12.26
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.82
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
MT Newswires · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Business Wire · 15.9.2026
Barrons.com · 15.9.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
StockStory · 14.9.2026
Halliburton (HAL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
HAL currently scores 47/100 (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.
HAL's technical score is 13/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 2.04; Current ratio: 2.04.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.12 (3y annualized return -6.7% / max drawdown 55.5%); Revenue growth (last year): -3.3%; Net income growth: -48.7%.
Yes — HAL 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 — 0 purchases and 22 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carre Eric | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 24,777 | -24,777 | $37.50 |
| Slocum Jeffrey Shannon | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 52,572 | -52,572 | $35.09 |
| Miller Jeffrey Allen | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 124,483 | -124,483 | $35.00 |
| Slocum Jeffrey Shannon | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 16,121 | -16,121 | $35.08 |
| Smith Maurice S | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,079.638 | +1,079.638 | — |
| Carre Eric | Open Market Sale | 18.6.2026 | 24,778 | -24,778 | $35.89 |
| Carre Eric | Open Market Sale | 18.6.2026 | 148,520 | -24,778 | $35.89 |
| Beckwith Van H. | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 198,349 | -198,349 | $41.29 |
| Beckwith Van H. | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 146,186 | -198,349 | $41.29 |
| Maxwell Michael Casey | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 6,782 | -6,782 | $42.00 |
| Maxwell Michael Casey | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 13,566 | -13,566 | $41.84 |
| Maxwell Michael Casey | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 100,545 | -13,566 | $41.84 |
| Maxwell Michael Casey | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 93,763 | -6,782 | $42.00 |
| McKeon Timothy | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 8,655 | -8,655 | $42.00 |
| Young Tobi M. | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 500 | -500 | $41.73 |
| Young Tobi M. | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 5,625 | -5,625 | $41.72 |
| McKeon Timothy | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 72,976 | -8,655 | $42.00 |
| Young Tobi M. | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 15,750 | -5,625 | $41.72 |
| Young Tobi M. | Open Market Sale | 30.4.2026 | 15,250 | -500 | $41.73 |
| Smith Maurice S | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.3.2026 | 827.815 | +827.815 | — |
| Smith Maurice S | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.3.2026 | 13,768 | +828 | — |
| Miller Jeffrey Allen | Open Market Sale | 27.3.2026 | 158,455 | -158,455 | $40.00 |
| Miller Jeffrey Allen | Open Market Sale | 27.3.2026 | 1,013,027 | -158,455 | $40.00 |
| Beckwith Van H. | Open Market Sale | 16.3.2026 | 19,618 | -19,618 | $33.82 |
| Slocum Jeffrey Shannon | Open Market Sale | 16.3.2026 | 5,441 | -5,441 | $33.82 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
34,163,905 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 35,341,034 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
27.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 40.8% 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