Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$46.47
▲ $0.25 (+0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/20 04:38 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$45.50 - $46.78
52-Week Range
$36.95 - $70.38
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$40.92
Resistance
$55.50
-27.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/27 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 33.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 0.21
Risk
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (74/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (45/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
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
42
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
74
Quality
50
Value
45
Momentum
19
Risk
28
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
42
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of TPG Inc. highlights its strategic expansion in healthcare and financial activities. Notably, TPG acquired an interest in Florida WellMed Clinics from UnitedHealth, reflecting its focus on health sector investments amid the conglomerate’s financial challenges. Additionally, TPG filed a confidential application to list Malaysia’s $8 billion hospital assets for an IPO, signaling major growth plans. The firm also announced a dividend declaration for its TPG RE Finance Trust and confirmed executive participation at the Barclays Global Financial Services Conference, underscoring its financial sector engagement.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about TPG Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 5 vs. 5 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
39
Psychology
27
Fundamentals
42
Technical
19
Valuation
45
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
33
Fundamental Reality
39
Narrative Gap
-6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **herding** behavior in TPG reflects a market response to relative underperformance (-3.3% vs. peers) rather than extreme sentiment. While euphoria persists (16.8% above 200-day average, 100/100 news), momentum is weak (-1.3% ROC), suggesting traders may be aligning with peers rather than chasing gains. The narrative-reality gap (23 points) hints at a disconnect where optimism outpaces technical signals, but no clear bias like overconfidence or anchoring is active. The key question: *Will herding sustain if TPG’s underperformance widens, or will euphoria reassert if fundamentals (EPS growth) justify the premium?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:25 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"TPG Files Confidential Application to List Malaysia Hospital Assets Worth $8 Billion"
"declared a cash dividend of $0.3906 per share of 6.25% Series C Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock"
📈 10D 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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that growth‑oriented thinkers such as Peter Lynch, Charles Mackay, Edgar Lawrence Smith and Samuel Armstrong Nelson assign very high scores (99‑93) because they see TPG’s price lagging its growth and its cycle position appearing favorable. In contrast, value‑focused and risk‑averse frameworks like Benjamin Graham, Graham’s Enterprising Investor, and the efficient‑market duo give the stock low to negative scores (22‑34) due to missing defensive margins, insufficient cheapness, and a weak case for passive indexing. Mid‑range scores from Howard Marks, Thorstein Veblen, Philip Fisher and Jack Schwager reflect mixed views on risk pricing, profit conversion, and overall quality, while the lowest scores from Jesse Livermore and the volatility warning from Morgan Housel highlight concerns about trending weakness and price swings. These divergent outcomes stem directly from each methodology’s emphasis—growth potential versus margin of safety, cycle timing versus market efficiency—rather than any new calculation.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 94
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 76
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 76
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 67
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
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)
🟡 57
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 57
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 55
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)
🔴 24
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 20
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)
🔴 15
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)
🔴 2
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
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
🔴 0
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 10 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 uptrend 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
12.3%
Net Margin
4.0%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
15.6%
ROA
1.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.89
Cash
$826.11M
Total Debt
$1.72B
Current Ratio
0.21
Debt/Equity
1.53
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $0.590 |
| 11.5.2026 | $0.590 |
| 10.5.2026 | $0.590 |
| 19.2.2026 | $0.610 |
| 18.2.2026 | $0.610 |
| 14.11.2025 | $0.450 |
| 13.11.2025 | $0.450 |
| 18.8.2025 | $0.590 |
| 17.8.2025 | $0.590 |
| 19.5.2025 | $0.410 |
| 18.5.2025 | $0.410 |
| 21.2.2025 | $0.530 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$3.14
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.39
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 10 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
TPG Inc. (TPG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
TPG currently scores 42/100 (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.
TPG's technical score is 19/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 33.4%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 207.1%; Net income growth: 686.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Current ratio: 0.21; Calmar: 0.31 (3y annualized return 14.4% / max drawdown 46.8%); Debt/equity: 1.53.
Yes — TPG 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andre Axel | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 164,908 | +164,908 | — |
| Andre Axel | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 164,908 | +164,908 | — |
| Rhodes Jeffrey K. | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 620 | +620 | — |
| Davis Kelvin L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 4 | +4 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 357 | +357 | — |
| Vazquez-Ubarri Anilu | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 155 | +155 | — |
| Raj Nehal | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 382 | +382 | — |
| Sarvananthan Ganendran | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 263 | +263 | — |
| Harris Joann | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 38 | +38 | — |
| COULTER JAMES G | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 3,577 | +3,577 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 1,152 | +1,152 | — |
| Davis Kelvin L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 1,202 | +1,202 | — |
| Sisitsky Todd Benjamin | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 984 | +984 | — |
| Sisitsky Todd Benjamin | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 98 | +98 | — |
| Trujillo David | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 630 | +630 | — |
| Davidson Martin | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 60 | +60 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 179 | +179 | — |
| COULTER JAMES G | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 35,644,619 | +3,577 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 11,552,294 | +1,152 | — |
| Trujillo David | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 6,582,823 | +630 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 4,025,525 | +357 | — |
| WINKELRIED JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 2,011,528 | +179 | — |
| Sisitsky Todd Benjamin | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 10,379,227 | +984 | — |
| Sisitsky Todd Benjamin | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 478,786 | +98 | — |
| Davis Kelvin L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 41,665 | +4 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
10,784,852 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,683,551 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
60.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.0% 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