Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$146.87
▼ $0.28 (-0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:00 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$145.74 - $147.84
52-Week Range
$77.58 - $156.92
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$120.16
Resistance
$156.92
MRK is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+80.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/28 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): 34.7% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $65.16 vs. price $146.87 (-55.6%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
86/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+5.3%
Median 40D Outcome
69/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+6.9% … +10.1%
🟡 Base
13%
+0.6% … +0.8%
🔴 Bearish
33%
-3.9% … -3.1%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 40 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +1.8%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
6 occurrence(s) · 33% historical success
Echo #2 — Trend Acceleration
4 occurrence(s) · 75% 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 | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.2% | -2.1% … +5.0% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -1.9% … +6.6% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.8% | -3.0% … +8.9% | +1.1% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.3% | -3.0% … +10.7% | +1.5% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +5.1% | +0.7% … +10.2% | +2.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-24 | 86/100 | Consolidation | -3.0% | -2.1% |
| 2018-12-27 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -3.3% | +10.0% |
| 2025-12-17 | 78/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +9.7% | +16.8% |
| 2026-04-20 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -3.9% | +9.0% |
| 2026-03-10 | 77/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +5.2% | +2.7% |
| 2022-06-21 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +1.8% | -1.5% |
| 2020-09-15 | 75/100 | Uptrend | -4.2% | -0.9% |
| 2023-03-16 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +7.4% | +2.3% |
| 2023-01-19 | 74/100 | Consolidation | -3.1% | +4.6% |
| 2026-01-26 | 74/100 | Uptrend | +15.4% | +5.1% |
| 2026-06-22 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +9.3% | +25.5% |
| 2023-02-08 | 73/100 | Consolidation | +0.9% | +10.4% |
| 2023-06-05 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +0.5% | -2.6% |
| 2022-11-11 | 72/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +11.2% | +8.9% |
| 2026-06-02 | 71/100 | Consolidation | +8.4% | +29.3% |
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 XLV (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
61
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
17d ago · $150.84
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 60)
What happened after
🐂🐻 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
50
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
65
Risk
48
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
74
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING MRK...
Recent media coverage of Merck & Co. has centered on its stock performance, market positioning, and strategic initiatives. Analysts discuss its reliance on key drugs like Skyrizi and Gardasil, with mixed views on whether the company’s portfolio remains strong. The company’s participation in industry conferences and a price target adjustment by Guggenheim highlight investor interest. Additionally, Merck’s involvement in innovative projects—such as blockchain-based cocoa traceability and partnerships in pulmonary hypertension—demonstrates its focus on emerging sectors, though broader cancer research remains speculative in headlines.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Merck & Co.. News trend score: 92. Reason: 10 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
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
49
Fundamentals
74
Technical
65
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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.
Price (3M)
+29%
Market Narrative
71
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+33
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant euphoria for MRK reflects a disconnect between technical signals (neutral RSI, modest momentum) and valuation extremes (128% DCF premium). Overconfidence may stem from anchoring to high fair-value estimates, while herding suggests selective participation amid peer underperformance. The 35-point narrative gap (73 vs. 38) hints at overinterpretation of positive news. Key question: Will sentiment sustain despite lagging fundamentals or technical divergence?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 06:48 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Guggenheim Adjusts Price Target on Merck & Co. to $170 From $146, Maintains Buy Rating"
📈 16D 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
Thorstein Veblen — 70/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 14/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that Veblen and Nelson give relatively high scores (70 and 66), reflecting optimism about growth and cycle positioning, while the efficient‑market view is more cautious (score 57) and Livermore, Loeb, and Smith hover around the middle (48‑45) indicating no clear trend or moderate risk. In contrast, later value‑oriented thinkers such as Marks, Graham, Fisher, and Lynch assign low scores (26‑14), flagging concerns about valuation, quality, and volatility. This spread illustrates how early‑era growth and cycle theories tend to view MRK more favorably, whereas modern safety‑margin and quality filters lead to a markedly more skeptical assessment.
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 60
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 57
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)
🟡 50
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 45
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 44
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 43
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 41
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 40
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 30
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 29
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 26
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 23
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)
🔴 18
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 14
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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 (6 bullish · 3 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.
The stock is in a clear uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low 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
74.8%
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
28.1%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
34.7%
ROA
13.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.30
Cash
$14.56B
Total Debt
$49.05B
Current Ratio
1.54
Debt/Equity
0.93
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.9.2026 | $0.850 |
| 15.6.2026 | $0.850 |
| 14.6.2026 | $0.850 |
| 16.3.2026 | $0.850 |
| 15.3.2026 | $0.850 |
| 15.12.2025 | $0.850 |
| 14.12.2025 | $0.850 |
| 15.9.2025 | $0.810 |
| 14.9.2025 | $0.810 |
| 16.6.2025 | $0.810 |
| 15.6.2025 | $0.810 |
| 17.3.2025 | $0.810 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$146.87
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$65.16
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-55.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
3.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.2% | $12.75B | $11.70B |
| 2 | 3.0% | $13.13B | $11.05B |
| 3 | 2.8% | $13.50B | $10.43B |
| 4 | 2.7% | $13.86B | $9.82B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $14.21B | $9.23B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$12.36B
Terminal Value
$224.05B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$145.62B
Enterprise Value
$197.85B
Net Debt
$34.48B
Equity Value
$163.36B
*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
$20.98
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.73
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 7 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 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
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Merck & Co. (MRK) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 61/100, 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.
MRK currently scores 61/100 (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, MRK's estimated fair value is $65.16, which is 55.6% below the current price of $146.87. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MRK's technical score is 65/100, 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: Return on equity (ROE): 34.7% — strong; Current ratio: 1.54; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $65.16 vs. price $146.87 (-55.6%); Calmar: 0.25 (3y annualized return 11.0% / max drawdown 44.7%); Free cash flow growth: -31.7%.
Yes — MRK 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 18 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guindo Chirfi | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $135.00 |
| Guindo Chirfi | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 36,613 | -10,000 | $135.00 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 600 | -600 | $132.04 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 11,099 | -11,099 | $131.61 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 13,433 | -13,433 | — |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 41,494 | -41,494 | — |
| Zachary Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 80,315 | -80,315 | $133.46 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 13,433 | +13,433 | $84.71 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 41,494 | +41,494 | $117.89 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 110,167 | -600 | $132.04 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 110,767 | -11,099 | $131.61 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 112,391 | +41,494 | $117.89 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 125,824 | +13,433 | $84.71 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 45,509 | -80,315 | $133.46 |
| Zachary Jennifer | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 0 | -41,494 | — |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 5,427 | -5,427 | $132.35 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 7,410 | -7,410 | $131.33 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 127,293 | -7,410 | $131.33 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 121,866 | -5,427 | $132.35 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 20,784 | -20,784 | $130.43 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 134,703 | -20,784 | $130.43 |
| Guindo Chirfi | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | $131.00 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 4,945 | -4,945 | $130.23 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 300 | -300 | $131.02 |
| DeLuca Richard R. | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 805 | -805 | $131.02 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
30,287,347 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 28,281,375 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. 52.2% 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