Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$38.39
▼ $0.83 (-2.1%)
Market data updated: 09/17 04:19 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$9.66B
Day Range
$38.14 - $39.14
52-Week Range
$29.19 - $51.59
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
MGM is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+10.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $84.32 vs. price $38.39 (+119.6%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.02 (3y annualized return -0.9% / max drawdown 46.0%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
85/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+7.6%
Median 40D Outcome
48/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
73%
+8.2% … +13.4%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
27%
-8.0% … -3.1%
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, 73% (95% CI 48%–89%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +10.6%.
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%) | +2.3% | -1.1% … +4.4% | +0.1% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.0% | -0.1% … +5.2% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 73% (48%–89%) | +10.6% | +1.4% … +11.4% | -0.3% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +7.6% | +0.0% … +11.1% | +1.1% |
| 60D | 60% (36%–80%) | +7.3% | -4.5% … +14.7% | +2.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-01-08 | 85/100 | Downtrend | +5.8% | -19.5% |
| 2024-12-17 | 80/100 | Downtrend | -7.1% | -9.9% |
| 2026-05-14 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +33.0% | +19.9% |
| 2017-10-16 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +11.4% | +18.3% |
| 2019-10-08 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +15.3% | +26.3% |
| 2024-05-30 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +15.3% | -1.3% |
| 2019-03-27 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +11.0% | +10.8% |
| 2025-10-09 | 76/100 | Downtrend | -2.2% | +10.1% |
| 2023-09-14 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -10.6% | -0.4% |
| 2025-04-01 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +5.1% | +14.8% |
| 2025-08-07 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +5.7% | -7.7% |
| 2026-01-20 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +10.7% | +14.6% |
| 2025-01-24 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +10.6% | -7.9% |
| 2024-04-26 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -3.3% | +3.3% |
| 2025-10-29 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +11.4% | +7.3% |
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 XLY (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
41
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
48
Quality
58
Value
57
Momentum
6
Risk
36
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
37
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING MGM...
Recent media coverage of **MGM Resorts** has been limited and indirect, with no direct headlines about the company. Most sources instead focus on unrelated topics like **Rush Street Interactive’s** competitive iGaming market challenges, broader U.S. equities trends (including MGM’s stock reaction to geopolitical shifts), and unrelated corporate events (e.g., People Incorporated’s conference participation). A single Yahoo Finance video highlights **BetMGM’s** push into sportsbooks over prediction markets ahead of the NFL season, but no further MGM-specific developments are noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about MGM Resorts. News trend score: 92. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
97
Fundamentals
37
Technical
6
Valuation
57
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-16%
Market Narrative
38
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
-2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
MGM’s psychology is dominated by **anchoring** (70), as the stock’s proximity to support (1.5%) suggests traders fixate on this level despite weak momentum and muted volume. The **loss aversion** score (35) reflects lingering reluctance to exit after a 13.2% drop, while **herding** (29) hints at cautious underperformance relative to peers. The narrative gap (-4) suggests traders may be underestimating current conditions. The key question: *Will traders break free from support fixation, or will the 1.5% buffer hold?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:41 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"blockbuster roster of culinary icons and beverage visionaries at Bellagio Fountain Club for FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN LAS VEGAS GRAND PRIX 2026"
"Trump to meet with CEOs of major travel companies including MGM"
📈 8D 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 — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits the historical methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: the bullish camp, led by technical and cyclical analysts, and the bearish camp, dominated by value and defensive investors. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay both see opportunity in MGM’s cyclical positioning—Nelson’s near-oversold reading and Mackay’s lack of crowd mania suggesting a contrarian edge—while Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) back this up with disciplined setups and early-cycle tailwinds. Meanwhile, the value-oriented crowd, from Benjamin Graham to Peter Lynch, overwhelmingly rejects the stock, citing weak defensive metrics, lack of growth, and overvaluation relative to their strict criteria. Even Morgan Housel and Howard Marks (general) hedge, warning of high expectations or moderate holdability, while the most aggressive bear cases—like Loeb, Veblen, and Livermore—flag outright risks, from capital threats to speculative overreach. The divide reflects a clash between momentum/cyclical optimism and deep-value caution, with no middle ground.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 66
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 54
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 46
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 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)
🟡 36
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 34
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 27
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 19
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)
🔴 19
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 13
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 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.
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
5.7%
Net Margin
1.2%
EBITDA Margin
11.5%
ROE
8.5%
ROA
0.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.77
Cash
$2.06B
Total Debt
$6.23B
Current Ratio
1.23
Debt/Equity
2.56
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 8.12.2022 | $0.003 |
| 7.12.2022 | $0.003 |
| 8.9.2022 | $0.003 |
| 7.9.2022 | $0.003 |
| 9.6.2022 | $0.003 |
| 8.6.2022 | $0.003 |
| 9.3.2022 | $0.003 |
| 8.3.2022 | $0.003 |
| 9.12.2021 | $0.003 |
| 8.12.2021 | $0.003 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$38.39
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$84.32
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+119.6%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.5% | $1.61B | $1.48B |
| 2 | 8.5% | $1.75B | $1.47B |
| 3 | 6.5% | $1.86B | $1.44B |
| 4 | 4.5% | $1.95B | $1.38B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $2.00B | $1.30B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.46B
Terminal Value
$31.50B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$20.47B
Enterprise Value
$27.55B
Net Debt
$4.17B
Equity Value
$23.38B
*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
$8.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$13.81
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
StockStory · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo Finance Video · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 4.9.2026
PR Newswire · 2.9.2026
PR Newswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
MGM Resorts (MGM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, 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.
MGM currently scores 41/100 (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, MGM's estimated fair value is $84.32, which is 119.6% above the current price of $38.39. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MGM'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: Estimated fair value: $84.32 vs. price $38.39 (+119.6%); Free cash flow growth: 20.5%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.02 (3y annualized return -0.9% / max drawdown 46.0%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -68.3%; Net income growth: -72.4%.
Yes — MGM 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fritz Gary M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,259 | -2,259 | — |
| Fritz Gary M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 2,259 | +2,259 | — |
| Fritz Gary M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 903 | -903 | $47.52 |
| Fritz Gary M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 132,907 | +2,259 | — |
| Fritz Gary M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 132,004 | -903 | $47.52 |
| Fritz Gary M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.7.2026 | 4,518 | -2,259 | — |
| LEVIN JOSEPH | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 732.064 | +732.064 | $47.81 |
| Meister Keith A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 836.645 | +836.645 | $47.81 |
| SALEM PAUL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 2,039.322 | +2,039.322 | $47.81 |
| SALEM PAUL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 126,916 | +2,039 | $47.81 |
| Meister Keith A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 70,478 | +837 | $47.81 |
| LEVIN JOSEPH | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,678 | +732 | $47.81 |
| TAYLOR DANIEL J | Open Market Sale | 22.5.2026 | 6,675 | -6,675 | $38.44 |
| TAYLOR DANIEL J | Open Market Sale | 22.5.2026 | 0 | -6,675 | $38.44 |
| Langley Donna | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| Barr Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| LEVIN JOSEPH | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| Mckinney-James Rose | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| Meister Keith A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| TAYLOR DANIEL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| SALEM PAUL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| Swartz Janet | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| Winston Ben | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| SALEM PAUL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
| TAYLOR DANIEL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 6,298 | +6,298 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,883,170 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 19,997,817 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.3% 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