Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$48.72
▼ $0.98 (-2.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:07 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$48.71 - $49.54
52-Week Range
$44.82 - $72.41
Beta
—
Next Earnings
05.10.2026
Support
$48.70
Resistance
$56.87
MKC 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.
-26.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 1/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Relative strength vs. S&P 500
+2.5% over the last 3 months relative to the index
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
81/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+7.4%
Median 40D Outcome
56/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
73%
+4.8% … +8.5%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.3% … +0.0%
🔴 Bearish
13%
-17.3% … -11.1%
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 +5.0%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
10 occurrence(s) · 70% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
1 occurrence(s) · 100% 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%) | +2.3% | +0.6% … +4.1% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 73% (48%–89%) | +2.1% | +1.1% … +4.0% | +0.3% |
| 20D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.0% | +1.2% … +8.2% | +0.5% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +7.4% | +0.4% … +13.3% | +0.4% |
| 60D | 80% (55%–93%) | +6.8% | +3.3% … +14.4% | +0.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-30 | 81/100 | Downtrend | -0.5% | +13.8% |
| 2022-09-09 | 75/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -8.1% | +5.2% |
| 2017-06-29 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +0.2% | +1.5% |
| 2026-01-28 | 71/100 | Downtrend | +12.0% | -16.7% |
| 2024-06-07 | 71/100 | Downtrend | +2.2% | +19.7% |
| 2024-01-22 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +5.3% | +11.9% |
| 2017-07-19 | 69/100 | Downtrend | +6.4% | +7.5% |
| 2025-09-23 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +4.1% | +6.8% |
| 2022-10-03 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +8.6% | +15.0% |
| 2023-03-10 | 67/100 | Downtrend | +20.2% | +27.1% |
| 2021-02-22 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +4.6% | +6.2% |
| 2026-03-10 | 64/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -20.3% | -26.5% |
| 2025-01-13 | 63/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +8.4% | +6.5% |
| 2025-05-22 | 63/100 | Downtrend | +5.0% | -3.2% |
| 2024-02-09 | 63/100 | Downtrend | +8.1% | +17.8% |
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
45
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
56
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
20
Risk
34
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
56
Institutional
50
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING MKC...
Recent media coverage of **McCormick & Company** highlights its strong financial performance and investor appeal, particularly through robust **dividend growth** and **profitability**. The company’s adjusted operating income surged by **30.1% in Q2 and 24.8% in H1 2026**, with expanding margins, positioning it as a **dividend aristocrat** with yields up to **4.7%**. While broader industry trends mention cuts or stagnation in some food giants, McCormick stands out as a **stable, high-yielding consumer staples stock**. Additionally, its role in **Unilever’s food operations merger**—including the sale of Colman’s mustard—has drawn attention to its core business valuation. Overall, analysts emphasize its **long-term growth potential** and resilience.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about McCormick & Company. News trend score: 74. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
99
Fundamentals
56
Technical
20
Valuation
50
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+4%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a **cautious, anchored stance**—traders appear anchored near support (4.3% above) while avoiding panic or euphoria. The narrative gap (47 vs. 36) hints at overestimation of positive fundamentals, yet neutral RSI and low volatility imply restrained selling. The key question: *Will traders defend support, or will the 12-period ROC (-6%) trigger further caution?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:11 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"McCormick and T. Rowe Price are among the stocks that have outperformed the S&P 500 over the past three months—and have dividend yields of at least 3%"
"McCormick's adjusted operating income rose 30.1% in Q2 and 24.8% in H1, with margins expanding"
"four consumer staples names kept raising their payouts straight through a housing collapse and a global lockdown"
"headlines around the planned sale of Colman's mustard as part of the wider merger of Unilever's food operations with McCormick"
📈 17D 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) — 8/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that the high scores from Nelson (96), Mackay (86) and Marks‑cycle (65) signal a favorable cycle position and an absence of crowd mania, which these frameworks view as a positive sign. The mid‑range scores from Schwager (61), Marks (57), Veblen (53), Smith (50) and Housel (44) indicate a mixed or moderate outlook, acknowledging a decent business but flagging concerns about expectations, profit conversion, or the effort required to hold the stock. The low scores from Graham (38), the efficient‑market view (38), Loeb (36), Fisher (21), Bagehot (19), Livermore (14), Lynch (13) and Graham‑Enterprising (7) highlight defensive deficiencies, liquidity risk, negative trend, and insufficient growth‑at‑reasonable‑price characteristics. This divergence arises because cycle‑ and sentiment‑focused methodologies are more optimistic, while value, quality, and risk‑oriented lenses are considerably more skeptical.
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)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 66
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 65
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 57
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 53
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 46
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 40
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)
🟡 36
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 36
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 21
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 16
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 13
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 8
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 (1 bullish · 9 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
$48.70
Range Bottom
$56.87
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
37.9%
Operating Margin
15.7%
Net Margin
11.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
13.8%
ROA
6.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.94
Cash
$95.90M
Total Debt
$3.61B
Current Ratio
0.70
Debt/Equity
0.70
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 6.7.2026 | $0.480 |
| 5.7.2026 | $0.480 |
| 20.4.2026 | $0.480 |
| 19.4.2026 | $0.480 |
| 29.12.2025 | $0.480 |
| 28.12.2025 | $0.480 |
| 14.10.2025 | $0.450 |
| 13.10.2025 | $0.450 |
| 7.7.2025 | $0.450 |
| 6.7.2025 | $0.450 |
| 7.4.2025 | $0.450 |
| 6.4.2025 | $0.450 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$21.37
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.33
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 6 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Fintel · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Barrons.com · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
McCormick & Company (MKC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 45/100, 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.
MKC currently scores 45/100 (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.
MKC's technical score is 20/100, 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: +2.5% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.70; Calmar: -0.32 (3y annualized return -14.8% / max drawdown 46.2%).
Yes — MKC 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 — 2 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2026 | 48.911 | +48.911 | $51.90 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2026 | 48.3 | +48.3 | $51.90 |
| Tapiero Jacques | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 185.874 | +185.874 | $53.80 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.8.2026 | 4,937 | +45 | $56.20 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.8.2026 | 14,489 | +45 | $56.20 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.8.2026 | 44.604 | +44.604 | $56.20 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.8.2026 | 45.168 | +45.168 | $56.20 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 47.779 | +47.779 | $53.13 |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 205,538 | -205,538 | $52.69 |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 205,538 | +205,538 | $49.03 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 47.181 | +47.181 | $53.13 |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 205,538 | -205,538 | — |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 296,992 | -205,538 | $52.69 |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 502,530 | +205,538 | $49.03 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 4,849 | +48 | $53.13 |
| Kurzius Lawrence Erik | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 0 | -205,538 | — |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 14,315 | +47 | $53.13 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 49.19 | +49.19 | $50.96 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 49.813 | +49.813 | $50.96 |
| Foley Brendan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 14,267 | +49 | $50.96 |
| Piper Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 4,801 | +50 | $50.96 |
| Conway Michael Aaron | Open Market Purchase | 23.7.2026 | 1,100 | +1,100 | $50.21 |
| Conway Michael Aaron | Open Market Purchase | 23.7.2026 | 1,100 | +1,100 | $50.21 |
| Foley Brendan M | Other Transaction | 22.7.2026 | 1,770 | +5 | $52.90 |
| Foley Brendan M | Other Transaction | 22.7.2026 | 5 | +5 | $52.90 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
16,047,875 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 13,682,180 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 71.5% 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