Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$143.16
▲ $2.81 (+2.0%)
Market data updated: 09/17 03:17 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$432.88B
Day Range
$139.00 - $146.50
52-Week Range
$114.50 - $329.50
Beta
—
Next Earnings
08.12.2026
ORCL is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-53.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/31 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
🔴 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: 34.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$145.31 vs. price $143.16 (-201.5%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (65/100), 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.
67/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
87/100
Analog Quality
+2.7%
Median 40D Outcome
10/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+3.9% … +15.6%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
47%
-22.1% … -9.1%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 60 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 +1.1%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
4 occurrence(s) · 75% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
1 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Echo #3 — Trend Acceleration
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 | 27% (11%–52%) | -2.3% | -4.7% … +1.7% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 27% (11%–52%) | -3.4% | -11.6% … +3.4% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.1% | -16.1% … +7.6% | +1.0% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.7% | -13.7% … +15.1% | +2.6% |
| 60D | 60% (36%–80%) | +4.5% | -14.1% … +11.5% | +3.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-30 | 67/100 | High Volatility | +39.9% | -25.7% |
| 2022-06-15 | 65/100 | Downtrend | +1.5% | +10.6% |
| 2025-10-23 | 65/100 | Uptrend | -24.8% | -37.9% |
| 2026-03-26 | 64/100 | Downtrend | +21.3% | +15.7% |
| 2026-06-15 | 64/100 | High Volatility | -31.2% | -20.6% |
| 2026-05-19 | 64/100 | Consolidation | +1.1% | -17.1% |
| 2023-09-15 | 62/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.0% | +1.1% |
| 2020-03-02 | 62/100 | Downtrend | -1.1% | +4.5% |
| 2018-02-06 | 62/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +4.7% | -8.8% |
| 2018-06-18 | 62/100 | Consolidation | +5.1% | +6.1% |
| 2026-01-16 | 62/100 | Downtrend | -19.4% | -11.1% |
| 2021-06-21 | 61/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +13.7% | +12.5% |
| 2018-12-27 | 60/100 | Downtrend | +10.1% | +18.5% |
| 2022-09-01 | 59/100 | Consolidation | -18.9% | +8.1% |
| 2026-03-12 | 57/100 | Downtrend | -13.2% | +33.1% |
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 XLK (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
48
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
1d ago · $144.79
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 28 to 2 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
13d ago · $154.39
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 11 to 37 day-over-day
What happened after
13d ago · $154.39
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 5 to 41 day-over-day
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
65
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
23
Risk
28
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
69
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING ORCL...
Recent media coverage of Oracle Corporation has primarily centered on its stock performance and investor sentiment, driven by expectations around artificial intelligence (AI) investments. Oracle’s shares surged nearly 15% in a month as optimism grew over its AI initiatives, particularly its ties to OpenAI’s new ChatGPT-6 Astra model. Analysts and traders also highlighted Oracle’s upcoming earnings report as a key focus, alongside broader discussions about its competitive position in cloud computing and AI-driven software.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Oracle Corporation. News trend score: 74. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 7 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
26
Fundamentals
69
Technical
23
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-22%
Market Narrative
48
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a dominant FOMO-driven rally, amplified by extreme positive sentiment and strong momentum. Overconfidence and euphoria are secondary, reflecting price decoupling from fundamentals. The 3-month underperformance hints at unresolved loss aversion, creating a tension between aggressive buying and lingering caution. The key question is whether the narrative gap (81 vs. 37) will sustain momentum or trigger a reversion to mean.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:41 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Investors regained their optimism for Oracle's big AI bets, at least temporarily."
"SNOW's AI Data Cloud... bolster its cloud analytics push against Dell Technologies and Oracle."
"What investors should be keeping an eye on in the earnings print, especially from a debt-issuance perspective."
"Oracle is among the most active stocks in the S&P500 index on Tuesday's session."
🧠 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 — 85/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The highest scores from Smith (80) and Lynch (78) indicate that, based on their documented principles, the model estimates ORCL fits a long‑term buy‑and‑hold or growth narrative. Mid‑range scores from Veblen, Livermore, Marks, Mackay, the efficient‑market view, Fisher, and Bagehot reflect mixed signals about profitability, market sentiment, liquidity and valuation, leading those frameworks to be more cautious. Lower scores from Loeb, Marks‑cycle, Housel, Schwager, Graham and the enterprising Graham variant flag heightened risk, late‑cycle concerns, volatility and insufficient margin of safety, so their models estimate staying out or waiting. The spread from 80 down to 9 illustrates how differing emphases on growth, intrinsic value, market efficiency and risk management produce divergent conclusions.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 85
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 84
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 70
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 62
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)
🟡 55
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 37
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 36
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 17
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 13
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 13
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 10
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)
🔴 4
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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
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.
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
65.8%
Operating Margin
30.6%
Net Margin
25.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
40.2%
ROA
6.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$5.94
Cash
$31.29B
Total Debt
$7.20B
Current Ratio
1.11
Debt/Equity
3.23
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.7.2026 | $0.500 |
| 9.7.2026 | $0.500 |
| 9.4.2026 | $0.500 |
| 8.4.2026 | $0.500 |
| 9.1.2026 | $0.500 |
| 8.1.2026 | $0.500 |
| 9.10.2025 | $0.500 |
| 8.10.2025 | $0.500 |
| 10.7.2025 | $0.500 |
| 9.7.2025 | $0.500 |
| 10.4.2025 | $0.500 |
| 9.4.2025 | $0.500 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$143.16
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$145.31
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-201.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.6% | $-26.19B | $-24.03B |
| 2 | 8.6% | $-28.44B | $-23.93B |
| 3 | 6.5% | $-30.30B | $-23.39B |
| 4 | 4.5% | $-31.66B | $-22.43B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-32.46B | $-21.09B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-23.69B
Terminal Value
$-511.81B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-332.64B
Enterprise Value
$-447.53B
Net Debt
$-24.09B
Equity Value
$-423.44B
*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
$14.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$13.64
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 2 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Oracle Corporation (ORCL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
ORCL currently scores 48/100 (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, ORCL's estimated fair value is -$145.31, which is 201.5% below the current price of $143.16. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ORCL's technical score is 23/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 34.3%; Net income growth: 37.3%; Return on equity (ROE): 40.2% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$145.31 vs. price $143.16 (-201.5%); Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 5.3% of price.
Yes — ORCL 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 20 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Levey Stuart | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 523.382 | +523.382 | $114.99 |
| Levey Stuart | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.7.2026 | 160,365 | +523 | $114.99 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 800 | -800 | $165.57 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 24.6.2026 | 400,000 | -400,000 | — |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 13,529 | -13,529 | $164.91 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 26,603 | -26,603 | $164.00 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 16,809 | -16,809 | $162.18 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 15,122 | -15,122 | $163.00 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 48,353 | -48,353 | $160.86 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 16,802 | -16,802 | $159.07 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 45,872 | -45,872 | $157.89 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 62,582 | -62,582 | $160.08 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 78,559 | -78,559 | $157.02 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 74,969 | -74,969 | $156.06 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 24.6.2026 | 400,000 | +400,000 | $40.93 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 24.6.2026 | 400,000 | +400,000 | $40.93 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 325,031 | -74,969 | $156.06 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 246,472 | -78,559 | $157.02 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 200,600 | -45,872 | $157.89 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 183,798 | -16,802 | $159.07 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 121,216 | -62,582 | $160.08 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 72,863 | -48,353 | $160.86 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 56,054 | -16,809 | $162.18 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 40,932 | -15,122 | $163.00 |
| HENLEY JEFFREY | Open Market Sale | 24.6.2026 | 14,329 | -26,603 | $164.00 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
44,597,874 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 50,143,917 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
38.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 39.9% 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