Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
$26.91
▼ $0.24 (-0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:09 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$15.89B
Day Range
$26.84 - $27.24
52-Week Range
$24.25 - $30.89
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$26.84
Resistance
$30.89
INVH is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-8.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/26 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 29.7%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $19.98 vs. price $26.91 (-25.8%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (73/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
77/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
-1.1%
Median 40D Outcome
80/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
27%
+3.9% … +5.4%
🟡 Base
27%
-0.1% … +0.3%
🔴 Bearish
47%
-4.5% … -2.6%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 27% (95% CI 11%–52%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -0.7%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
4 occurrence(s) · 25% 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%) | +1.6% | +0.8% … +2.7% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.5% | -1.2% … +3.4% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 27% (11%–52%) | -0.7% | -2.8% … +1.6% | +0.5% |
| 40D | 33% (15%–58%) | -1.1% | -4.2% … +2.2% | +1.0% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -2.3% | -6.3% … +5.2% | +1.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-25 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +4.3% | +5.4% |
| 2025-06-05 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -1.9% | -7.9% |
| 2018-10-12 | 76/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +2.9% | -3.6% |
| 2024-10-09 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +0.3% | -6.3% |
| 2018-01-19 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -3.0% | +3.5% |
| 2018-02-06 | 75/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +5.3% | +9.1% |
| 2023-09-29 | 74/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -9.1% | +8.2% |
| 2025-07-15 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -5.7% | -11.6% |
| 2025-08-06 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +0.3% | -6.1% |
| 2025-09-25 | 72/100 | Downtrend | +0.0% | -6.4% |
| 2025-06-30 | 71/100 | Consolidation | -2.4% | -10.9% |
| 2025-10-09 | 71/100 | Downtrend | -0.7% | +0.4% |
| 2022-01-27 | 71/100 | Consolidation | -2.7% | +6.7% |
| 2024-11-04 | 70/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +5.7% | -2.3% |
| 2024-12-17 | 68/100 | Downtrend | -3.3% | +5.1% |
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 XLRE (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
43
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
73
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
6
Risk
50
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
51
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING INVH...
Recent media coverage of Invitation Homes has focused on its strategic initiatives and operational updates. The company announced the release of its **2025 Impact Report**, highlighting sustainability efforts, and appointed **James Curl as Chief Technology Officer** to strengthen its tech leadership. Additionally, investor attention has centered on its stock performance, particularly post-earnings trends and broader market influences like rising interest rates and economic policy shifts.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Invitation Homes. News trend score: 74. Reason: 7 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
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
95
Fundamentals
51
Technical
6
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
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.
Price (3M)
-5%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for INVH strongly suggests **anchoring**, as traders appear fixated on a near-term support level (0.7% distance). Overconfidence (38) may also play a role, given the disconnect between price momentum (-6.3%) and fundamental growth (+0.3% EPS). The narrative gap (42 vs. 38) hints at a slight overestimation of positives, but the lack of euphoria or FOMO signals cautious positioning. The key question: *Will traders break free from the support anchor, or will overconfidence in fundamentals sustain the hold?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:48 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"JP Morgan analyst Anthony Paolone maintains Invitation Homes with an Overweight rating and raises the price target from $33 to $34"
"Invitation Homes announced James Curl will join as Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer on September 8"
"Invitation Home (INVH) reported earnings 30 days ago; stock down 1.5% since last earnings report"
"Invitation Homes released its 2025 Impact Report, Bringing Sustainability Home"
📈 9D 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 — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish and bearish camps, with Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score of 99 and his 'oversold' cycle verdict standing out as an outlier, suggesting this stock aligns with his contrarian, momentum-driven approach. Meanwhile, Charles Mackay’s high score (85) and lack of crowd mania signals imply a more stable, less speculative opportunity, while Howard Marks (Market Cycle) and Morgan Housel’s mid-range scores (72 and 67) hint at a stock that’s neither wildly overvalued nor a clear growth powerhouse—just a steady, patient-friendly hold. On the other end, Benjamin Graham’s scores (20 and 6) and his 'defensive criteria' failure make a stark contrast, framing the stock as risky or overpriced for his value-focused lens. Philip Fisher’s low score (43) and Livermore’s negative trend verdict (32) further underscore skepticism about long-term quality or trend-following potential, while the efficient-market camp’s lukewarm verdict (39) questions whether active selection here beats passive indexing.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 98
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 77
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 67
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 65
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 64
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 54
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 50
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 48
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 43
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 40
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)
🔴 30
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 21
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
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 · 11 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 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
—
Net Margin
21.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.2%
ROA
3.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.96
Cash
$129.97M
Total Debt
$8.38B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.88
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 25.6.2026 | $0.300 |
| 24.6.2026 | $0.300 |
| 26.3.2026 | $0.300 |
| 25.3.2026 | $0.300 |
| 23.12.2025 | $0.300 |
| 22.12.2025 | $0.300 |
| 25.9.2025 | $0.290 |
| 24.9.2025 | $0.290 |
| 26.6.2025 | $0.290 |
| 25.6.2025 | $0.290 |
| 27.3.2025 | $0.290 |
| 26.3.2025 | $0.290 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$26.91
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$19.98
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-25.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
6.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.9% | $1.26B | $1.15B |
| 2 | 5.8% | $1.33B | $1.12B |
| 3 | 4.7% | $1.39B | $1.08B |
| 4 | 3.6% | $1.44B | $1.02B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.48B | $961.61M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.18B
Terminal Value
$23.33B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$15.16B
Enterprise Value
$20.50B
Net Debt
$8.25B
Equity Value
$12.25B
*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
$15.54
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$15.12
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 10 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Zacks · 7.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Business Wire · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Zacks · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
Business Wire · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 25.8.2026
Invitation Homes (INVH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
INVH currently scores 43/100 (Weak) 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, INVH's estimated fair value is $19.98, which is 25.8% below the current price of $26.91. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
INVH's technical score is 6/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 29.7%; Net income growth: 29.5%; ATR: 1.7% of price.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $19.98 vs. price $26.91 (-25.8%); Calmar: -0.22 (3y annualized return -7.6% / max drawdown 34.6%); Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — INVH 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eisen Scott G. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 7,420 | -7,420 | $29.72 |
| Eisen Scott G. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 263,812 | -7,420 | $29.72 |
| TAYLOR KEITH D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Barbe, Cohen Jana | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Fascitelli Michael D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Sevilla-Sacasa Frances Aldrich | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Smith Kenny Kellyn | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| KELTER JEFFREY E | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Margolis Joseph D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| Howard Hugh Wyman III | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,559 | +6,559 | — |
| TAYLOR KEITH D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 23,128 | +6,559 | — |
| KELTER JEFFREY E | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 63,845 | +6,559 | — |
| Fascitelli Michael D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 87,541 | +6,559 | — |
| Margolis Joseph D | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 38,474 | +6,559 | — |
| Sevilla-Sacasa Frances Aldrich | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 23,128 | +6,559 | — |
| Howard Hugh Wyman III | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 15,545 | +6,559 | — |
| Barbe, Cohen Jana | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 40,211 | +6,559 | — |
| Smith Kenny Kellyn | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 12,143 | +6,559 | — |
| SOLLS MARK A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.5.2026 | 8,727 | +8,727 | — |
| SOLLS MARK A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.5.2026 | 224,790 | +8,727 | — |
| Norrell Kimberly K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.3.2026 | 265 | -265 | $26.34 |
| Norrell Kimberly K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.3.2026 | 460 | -460 | $26.34 |
| Norrell Kimberly K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.3.2026 | 268 | -268 | $26.34 |
| Eisen Scott G. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.3.2026 | 33,695 | +33,695 | — |
| Olsen Jonathan S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.3.2026 | 1,425 | -1,425 | $26.34 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,076,448 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 12,173,466 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
24.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 36.9% 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