Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Utilities · ·
$13.38
▲ $0.03 (+0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 12:50 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$35.86B
Day Range
$13.24 - $13.59
52-Week Range
$12.59 - $19.16
Beta
—
Next Earnings
21.10.2026
PCG is a stock from the Utilities sector — Electricity, water, and residential gas — steady demand and heavy regulation, considered a defensive, dividend-paying sector.
-11.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$49.35 vs. price $13.38 (-468.8%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
+8.6%
Median 40D Outcome
0/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+6.1% … +12.0%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.6% … +0.6%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-17.2% … -4.7%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 10 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 67% (95% CI 42%–85%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.9%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
5 occurrence(s) · 60% 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%) | +2.7% | -0.4% … +5.6% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.5% | -1.0% … +6.4% | +0.4% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +5.9% | -1.5% … +11.1% | +0.6% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +8.6% | +1.0% … +12.6% | +0.7% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +8.5% | -7.3% … +15.1% | +0.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-31 | 80/100 | Downtrend | -40.3% | -60.3% |
| 2025-01-29 | 80/100 | Downtrend | +0.6% | +8.5% |
| 2017-10-27 | 78/100 | High Volatility | -5.1% | -23.9% |
| 2020-07-16 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +6.7% | +19.3% |
| 2022-07-05 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +12.0% | +29.3% |
| 2018-01-16 | 71/100 | Downtrend | -9.5% | +1.4% |
| 2019-05-29 | 71/100 | Downtrend | +26.8% | -31.8% |
| 2021-08-09 | 71/100 | Downtrend | +9.2% | +31.4% |
| 2025-07-07 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +10.3% | +10.6% |
| 2020-07-01 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +2.8% | +10.7% |
| 2025-06-20 | 67/100 | Downtrend | -3.5% | +7.8% |
| 2026-05-07 | 66/100 | Consolidation | +5.7% | +7.8% |
| 2020-01-10 | 66/100 | High Volatility | +76.8% | -16.0% |
| 2025-02-14 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +11.9% | +10.9% |
| 2025-12-11 | 63/100 | Downtrend | +5.9% | +22.3% |
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 XLU (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
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
16d ago · $14.06
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 40 to 76 day-over-day
What happened after
17d ago · $13.27
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 40 to 76 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
50
Quality
58
Value
48
Momentum
16
Risk
20
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
41
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING PCG...
Recent media coverage of PG&E Corporation has primarily centered on its wildfire liability challenges in California, where stalled legislative reforms have weighed heavily on investor sentiment. Stock performance has suffered as lawmakers failed to advance a deal that would have shifted or reduced liability risks for utilities like PG&E, prompting downgrades from analysts and broader market underperformance. Analysts remain cautiously optimistic despite short-term pressures.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about PG&E Corporation. News trend score: 74. Reason: 8 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
12
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
70
Fundamentals
41
Technical
16
Valuation
48
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is consistent with **panic selling**, driven by extreme volume, volatility, and negative momentum. The narrative gap (-15) further suggests traders are overreacting to recent declines, possibly amplifying downward pressure. While loss aversion (9) and herding (+3.6% vs. peers) are present, panic (63) dominates due to technical extremes. The key question: *Will volume and volatility sustain, or will buyers emerge at this support level?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:05 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"a bill that would update the state’s wildfire response, but would not shift liability away from publicly traded utilities"
"Truist Securities Downgrades PG&E (PCG) to Hold from Buy"
"PG&E Corporation has underperformed the Nasdaq Composite over the past year"
📈 13D 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 — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a deep split between methodologies prioritizing macro positioning and those demanding strict fundamental or behavioral discipline. On one end, Charles Mackay and Howard Marks (both cycle-focused) see it as a relatively safe bet, with Mackay noting no crowd mania and Marks marking it as early-to-mid cycle—suggesting room for upside without extreme risk. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Jack Schwager further validate this view, emphasizing favorable cycle positioning and disciplined setups. Conversely, the more stringent fundamentalists—like Benjamin Graham (both versions), Philip Fisher, and Peter Lynch—reject it outright, either because it fails their core tests (e.g., Graham’s margin of safety or Fisher’s growth/quality criteria) or lacks the clear growth-at-a-reasonable-price profile Lynch demands. Meanwhile, behavioral and risk-averse frameworks (Bagehot, Loeb, Housel) dismiss it entirely, flagging liquidity risks, volatility, or capital-threatening exposure, while efficient-market adherents (Malkiel/Bogle) dismiss it as unnecessary complexity. The divide underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in its cyclical or macro context (favored by a few) or whether it’s fundamentally or psychologically flawed (rejected by the majority).
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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)
🟢 84
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)
🟢 67
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 59
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 57
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 52
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 34
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 25
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)
🔴 15
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)
🔴 10
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)
🔴 8
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
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 · 10 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 downtrend 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
—
Operating Margin
19.0%
Net Margin
10.8%
EBITDA Margin
19.0%
ROE
8.3%
ROA
1.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.18
Cash
$713.00M
Total Debt
$58.21B
Current Ratio
0.97
Debt/Equity
1.79
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.050 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.050 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.050 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.050 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.050 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.050 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.025 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.025 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.025 |
| 29.6.2025 | $0.025 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.025 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.025 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$13.38
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$49.35
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-468.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.9% | $-3.22B | $-2.96B |
| 2 | 4.3% | $-3.36B | $-2.83B |
| 3 | 3.7% | $-3.49B | $-2.69B |
| 4 | 3.1% | $-3.59B | $-2.55B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-3.68B | $-2.39B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-3.07B
Terminal Value
$-58.09B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-37.75B
Enterprise Value
$-51.17B
Net Debt
$57.49B
Equity Value
$-108.66B
*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
$14.78
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$14.78
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Fintel · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Utility Dive · 10.9.2026
ChartMill · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
ChartMill · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
PG&E Corporation (PCG) 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.
PCG 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, PCG's estimated fair value is -$49.35, which is 468.8% below the current price of $13.38. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PCG's technical score is 16/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; NAV per share: $14.78; P/E: 11.3.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$49.35 vs. price $13.38 (-468.8%); ATR: 5.5% of price; Current ratio: 0.97.
Yes — PCG 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 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fugate William Craig | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 6,500 | -6,500 | $13.76 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 420.71 | +420.71 | $17.60 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 34,931 | +421 | $17.60 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.8.2026 | 11,240 | +11,240 | — |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 5,086 | -5,086 | $17.38 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.8.2026 | 75,229 | +11,240 | — |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 70,143 | -5,086 | $17.38 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.7.2026 | 422.15 | +422.15 | $17.54 |
| Santos Marlene | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 158,250 | -158,250 | $18.00 |
| Cooper Kerry Whorton | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 1,250 | -1,250 | $18.00 |
| Santos Marlene | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 230,885 | -158,250 | $18.00 |
| Cooper Kerry Whorton | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 88,475 | -1,250 | $18.00 |
| DENAULT LEO P | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,932.22 | +1,932.22 | $16.82 |
| DENAULT LEO P | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 10,970 | +1,932 | $16.82 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 441.54 | +441.54 | $16.77 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 33,991 | +442 | $16.77 |
| Peterman Carla J | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 31,786 | -31,786 | $16.68 |
| Peterman Carla J | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 163,305 | -31,786 | $16.68 |
| FERGUSON III MARK E | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 10,675.16 | +10,675.16 | — |
| FERGUSON III MARK E | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 10,675.16 | -10,675.16 | — |
| FERGUSON III MARK E | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 20,756 | -10,675 | — |
| FERGUSON III MARK E | Gift | 5.6.2026 | 10,675 | +10,675 | — |
| Cooper Kerry Whorton | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 1,250 | -1,250 | $16.50 |
| Cooper Kerry Whorton | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 89,603 | -1,250 | $16.50 |
| Vallejo Alejandro T | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.5.2026 | 449.03 | +449.03 | $16.49 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
38,398,653 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 33,124,054 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
23.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 40.7% 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