Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$60.00
▼ $0.75 (-1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/19 04:15 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$35.44B
Day Range
$59.99 - $61.00
52-Week Range
$54.15 - $76.58
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.12.2026
Support
$54.83
Resistance
$62.55
KR 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.
-9.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
+5.8%
Median 40D Outcome
61/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+3.5% … +8.7%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
53%
-9.1% … -3.3%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -2.7%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
7 occurrence(s) · 43% 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 | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.9% | -1.5% … +2.9% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.9% | -1.3% … +4.8% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | -2.7% | -7.7% … +5.9% | +0.7% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.8% | -4.8% … +10.7% | +2.0% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.0% | -6.9% … +12.0% | +2.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-13 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -7.5% | -4.9% |
| 2019-09-18 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -2.8% | +11.8% |
| 2018-05-18 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +4.5% | +22.3% |
| 2018-04-30 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -2.7% | +12.3% |
| 2022-12-01 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -7.9% | -10.4% |
| 2019-05-02 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -11.5% | -16.9% |
| 2021-03-09 | 76/100 | Uptrend | +7.8% | +11.7% |
| 2022-08-25 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -9.0% | -2.1% |
| 2023-03-20 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +1.1% | -0.3% |
| 2018-06-05 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +15.2% | +23.2% |
| 2022-11-16 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -9.1% | -8.8% |
| 2019-04-17 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -3.4% | -13.5% |
| 2019-11-04 | 73/100 | Consolidation | +9.6% | +7.5% |
| 2021-01-21 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +2.4% | +12.7% |
| 2023-03-03 | 70/100 | Consolidation | +7.4% | -0.0% |
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
53
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 · $60.63
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 3 to 46 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
40
Quality
42
Value
45
Momentum
77
Risk
28
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
37
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING KR...
Recent media coverage on Kroger focuses on its upcoming second-quarter earnings report and strategic moves alongside Albertsons to compete with Amazon and Walmart. Financial reports highlight that
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Kroger. News trend score: 80. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 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)
36
Psychology
52
Fundamentals
37
Technical
77
Valuation
45
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.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+6%
Market Narrative
60
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+24
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
KR’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, as the 11.4% three-month decline and muted volume imply traders are hesitant to realize losses. Herding (score 35) suggests underperformance relative to peers may be prompting passive alignment, while anchoring (4.0% above support) hints at reluctance to sell near psychological barriers. The narrative-reality gap (17) further signals misalignment between expectations and fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will hold or exit near support, given the lack of panic or FOMO signals. Overconfidence (5) is minimal, suggesting no overreaction to momentum.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:08 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Kroger shares weighed by inflation pressure and slowing sales"
"Consumers aren’t spending less, but they are more stressed about their grocery bills"
"Wall Street looking for adjusted earnings of $1.05 per share"
"Walmart, Target, and Kroger face growing retail crime issue"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 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
Charles Mackay — 72/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Charles Mackay's documented principles, the model estimates a strong positive view (score 95) because there is no crowd mania, while Graham's criteria produce a zero score, reflecting failure on defensive safety margins. Howard Marks's cycle‑based assessments sit in the mid‑range (76 and 52), indicating the stock is in an early‑to‑mid cycle but may already have high expectations. The efficient‑market view and the more conservative wizards (Schwager, Smith, Housel, Loeb, Livermore, Veblen, Fisher, Lynch, Bagehot) assign lower scores (47 down to 6), highlighting concerns about lack of a clear setup, stability, volatility, risk, trend, growth quality, and liquidity. The spread of scores therefore mirrors the differing lenses—sentiment and cycle, valuation safety, growth quality, and market efficiency—each leading to divergent conclusions about the stock.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 72
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟢 66
A real, well-supported case — deviating from a broad index may be justified here
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)
🟡 47
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 41
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 34
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 34
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 31
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 30
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 27
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 25
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 24
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 10
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 7
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 6
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
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
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 1 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.
A trading range after a decline, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of an accumulation phase.
Low confidence
$54.83
Range Bottom
$62.55
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
1.3%
Net Margin
0.7%
EBITDA Margin
3.5%
ROE
17.1%
ROA
2.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.55
Cash
$3.33B
Total Debt
$15.88B
Current Ratio
0.80
Debt/Equity
2.68
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $0.390 |
| 15.5.2026 | $0.350 |
| 14.5.2026 | $0.350 |
| 13.2.2026 | $0.350 |
| 12.2.2026 | $0.350 |
| 14.11.2025 | $0.350 |
| 13.11.2025 | $0.350 |
| 15.8.2025 | $0.350 |
| 14.8.2025 | $0.350 |
| 15.5.2025 | $0.320 |
| 14.5.2025 | $0.320 |
| 14.2.2025 | $0.320 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$9.05
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.85
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 7 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Kroger (KR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 53/100, 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.
KR currently scores 53/100 (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.
KR's technical score is 77/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Price is above the 50-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; RSI 56.0 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.80; Calmar: 0.35 (3y annualized return 9.2% / max drawdown 26.5%).
Yes — KR 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 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sutton Mark S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 49.977 | +49.977 | $57.94 |
| SARGENT RONALD | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 461.923 | +461.923 | $57.94 |
| Gates Anne | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 188.308 | +188.308 | $57.94 |
| Aufreiter Nora A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 72.606 | +72.606 | $57.94 |
| FIKE CARIN L | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 56 | -56 | $56.56 |
| Aufreiter Nora A | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| Butier Mitchell R | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| Brown Kevin M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| Gates Anne | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| SOURRY KNOX JUDITH AMANDA | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| SARGENT RONALD | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 7,916 | +7,916 | — |
| HOGUET KAREN M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| Vemuri Ashok | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| Sutton Mark S | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,660 | +3,660 | — |
| SARGENT RONALD | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 262,914 | +7,916 | — |
| HOGUET KAREN M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 31,938 | +3,660 | — |
| Butier Mitchell R | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 3,949 | +3,660 | — |
| Sutton Mark S | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 46,004 | +3,660 | — |
| Vemuri Ashok | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 39,361 | +3,660 | — |
| Aufreiter Nora A | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 52,967 | +3,660 | — |
| Gates Anne | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 27,976 | +3,660 | — |
| SOURRY KNOX JUDITH AMANDA | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,465 | +3,660 | — |
| FIKE CARIN L | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 50,683 | -56 | $56.56 |
| Brown Kevin M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,465 | +3,660 | — |
| COSSET YAEL | Open Market Sale | 14.7.2026 | 30,000 | -30,000 | $58.80 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
28,596,616 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 25,866,694 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 48.9% 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