Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$88.25
▲ $0.19 (+0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 10:35 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$379.69B
Day Range
$87.52 - $88.29
52-Week Range
$65.35 - $92.49
Beta
—
Next Earnings
19.10.2026
Support
$80.83
Resistance
$92.49
KO is a stock from the Consumer Defensive sector — Food, beverages, and household products — steady demand even in a recession, since these are essential consumer goods.
+31.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/29 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 23.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $19.91 vs. price $88.25 (-77.4%)
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.
83/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+1.2%
Median 40D Outcome
77/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
33%
+3.6% … +4.6%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.7% … -0.5%
🔴 Bearish
53%
-4.0% … -1.8%
📌 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 -1.0%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
3 occurrence(s) · 67% 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 | 27% (11%–52%) | -0.7% | -1.8% … +0.9% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 27% (11%–52%) | -0.9% | -1.8% … +0.5% | +0.4% |
| 20D | 33% (15%–58%) | -1.0% | -2.2% … +2.8% | +0.9% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.2% | -4.2% … +4.6% | +1.6% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.4% | -5.3% … +7.5% | +2.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-24 | 83/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -0.8% | -0.7% |
| 2026-03-17 | 83/100 | Uptrend | -2.9% | +6.4% |
| 2019-10-17 | 81/100 | Consolidation | -2.2% | +4.1% |
| 2021-06-28 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +5.5% | -0.2% |
| 2026-06-17 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +2.0% | +11.8% |
| 2024-09-19 | 79/100 | Uptrend | -1.0% | -10.6% |
| 2026-05-29 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +4.6% | +16.0% |
| 2024-10-18 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -12.4% | -11.6% |
| 2025-06-13 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -2.3% | -4.5% |
| 2025-12-17 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -0.3% | +9.8% |
| 2024-10-03 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -7.4% | -12.0% |
| 2025-06-30 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -1.9% | -6.1% |
| 2025-03-26 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +3.6% | -0.4% |
| 2025-07-21 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -1.3% | -3.7% |
| 2026-03-31 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +3.7% | +8.7% |
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 XLP (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
62
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
71
$91.64
Now
62
$88.25
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
73
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
46
Risk
58
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
78
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING KO...
Recent media coverage of The Coca-Cola Company has focused on its strong stock performance, particularly its 26% gain in 2026, positioning it as a defensive "buy" despite reaching all-time highs. Analysts highlight its resilience in the consumer staples sector but raise concerns about valuation and regulatory pressures, including health regulations and GLP-1 market impacts. Comparisons to peers like Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble emphasize its dominance, though some suggest it may be overpriced. No company-specific operational or financial updates are present in the provided sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Coca-Cola Company (The). News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 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
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
78
Technical
46
Valuation
38
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
75
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+34
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests traders are overestimating KO’s value (+344% DCF premium) despite weak momentum and neutral RSI, consistent with overconfidence. The narrative gap (25 points) implies optimism outpaces fundamentals, while herding may persist if peers underperform further. Key question: Will traders reassess valuation when momentum aligns with earnings growth? The absence of anchoring or loss aversion signals no defensive positioning, leaving overconfidence as the dominant bias.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 12:55 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Coca-Cola has beaten the S&P 500 index over the past year, leaving it fully priced, if not a little expensive."
"Which Defensive Stock Has Dominated in 2026: Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, or Procter & Gamble?"
"Wall Street is favoring Coca-Cola instead."
📈 15D 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
Morgan Housel — 83/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 5/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that the scores for KO range from a strong endorsement by Morgan Housel (82) – who sees it as a quiet compounder – down to a near‑failure of Benjamin Graham’s defensive criteria (5). Investors who prioritize long‑term cash‑flow stability and real value creation, such as Housel, Veblen, Loeb, and Smith, give moderately high marks, while those focused on growth versus price, like Peter Lynch and Philip Fisher, assign middle‑range scores. Market‑efficiency and trend‑following frameworks (Malkiel & Bogle, Livermore, Schwager) are far more skeptical, producing scores in the 20‑40 band. Howard Marks’ cycle‑sensitivity further depresses the rating, flagging late‑cycle risk, and Graham’s stricter safety margin yields the lowest figure. The spread of opinions therefore reflects how each methodology weights factors such as cash‑flow durability, growth premium, market cycles, and safety margins.
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 83
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 81
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 63
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)
🟡 61
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 56
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 54
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 51
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 47
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 32
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 21
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 20
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 5
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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 (3 bullish · 6 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.
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
61.6%
Operating Margin
28.7%
Net Margin
27.3%
EBITDA Margin
30.9%
ROE
40.7%
ROA
12.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.05
Cash
$10.27B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.46
Debt/Equity
—
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.6.2026 | $0.530 |
| 14.6.2026 | $0.530 |
| 13.3.2026 | $0.530 |
| 12.3.2026 | $0.530 |
| 1.12.2025 | $0.510 |
| 30.11.2025 | $0.510 |
| 15.9.2025 | $0.510 |
| 14.9.2025 | $0.510 |
| 13.6.2025 | $0.510 |
| 12.6.2025 | $0.510 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.510 |
| 13.3.2025 | $0.510 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$88.25
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$19.91
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-77.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
3.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.7% | $5.49B | $5.04B |
| 2 | 3.4% | $5.68B | $4.78B |
| 3 | 3.1% | $5.86B | $4.52B |
| 4 | 2.8% | $6.02B | $4.26B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $6.17B | $4.01B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$5.30B
Terminal Value
$97.30B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$63.24B
Enterprise Value
$85.85B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$85.85B
*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
$7.46
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.87
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Coca-Cola Company (The) (KO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 62/100, 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.
KO currently scores 62/100 (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, KO's estimated fair value is $19.91, which is 77.4% below the current price of $88.25. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
KO's technical score is 46/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 23.6%; Net income growth: 23.3%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $19.91 vs. price $88.25 (-77.4%); MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend.
Yes — KO 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 7 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 29,246 | +29,246 | $60.28 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 40,754 | -40,754 | — |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 41,365 | -41,365 | — |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 40,754 | +40,754 | $60.02 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 40,754 | -40,754 | $90.93 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 41,365 | -41,365 | $90.93 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 29,246 | -29,246 | — |
| Pietracci Bruno | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 29,246 | -29,246 | $90.93 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 41,365 | +41,365 | $61.34 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 0 | -41,365 | — |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 40,754 | +40,754 | $60.02 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 0 | -41,365 | $90.93 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 29,246 | +29,246 | $60.28 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 41,365 | +41,365 | $61.34 |
| Pietracci Bruno | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 13,585 | -40,754 | — |
| QUAN NANCY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | — |
| QUAN NANCY | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | $90.39 |
| QUAN NANCY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $50.44 |
| Ray Sanket | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 9,958 | -9,958 | $86.50 |
| Ray Sanket | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 62,105 | -9,958 | $86.50 |
| Ortega Luisa | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 6.8.2026 | 21,848 | -21,848 | — |
| Ortega Luisa | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 6.8.2026 | 10,684 | -10,684 | — |
| Ortega Luisa | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 6.8.2026 | 7,628 | -7,628 | — |
| Ortega Luisa | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 6.8.2026 | 7,628 | +7,628 | $48.08 |
| Ortega Luisa | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 6.8.2026 | 10,684 | +10,684 | $59.49 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
39,287,289 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 44,821,363 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 37.4% 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