Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$70.50
▼ $0.37 (-0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/20 04:07 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$144.00B
Day Range
$70.06 - $71.00
52-Week Range
$65.41 - $101.99
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$65.41
Resistance
$82.36
UBER is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-25.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $99.73 vs. price $70.50 (+41.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.41 (3y annualized return 14.0% / max drawdown 34.1%)
Risk
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
54
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 · $75.96
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 9 to -23 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
69
$80.35
Now
54
$70.50
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
67
Quality
63
Value
67
Momentum
13
Risk
48
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
71
Institutional
75
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING UBER...
Recent media coverage of Uber has centered on its competitive pressures amid Tesla’s expanding **Cybercab** robotaxi initiative, which has caused investor uncertainty and a stock decline despite the company’s reported financial improvements—including doubled profits and strong cash flow. Analysts debate whether Uber’s long-term growth hinges on autonomous vehicle adoption, while some firms like Wedbush highlight its potential benefits. Meanwhile, Tesla’s aggressive entry into ride-hailing has intensified market scrutiny, overshadowing Uber’s positive fundamentals.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Uber. 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
15
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
44
Fundamentals
71
Technical
13
Valuation
67
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-2%
Market Narrative
34
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
-8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Uber’s psychology profile suggests a **herding-driven relative underperformance**—evidenced by its -3.5% lag behind peers (MMM, AOS, ALLE) in today’s session. The absence of FOMO or euphoria, paired with negative momentum and discounted valuation (-27% vs. DCF), indicates investors are following broader sector trends rather than chasing gains. Mild panic signals (volatility near baseline, neutral volume) may reflect cautious positioning but lack extreme urgency. The key question: *Is this herding a tactical rotation or a structural shift in valuation expectations?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:29 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Uber stock fell Tuesday as investors continued to debate the competitive threat of Tesla's Cybercab plans."
"Wedbush analyst Ygal Arounian reiterates Uber Technologies with an Outperform and maintains $91 price target."
"Uber's profits doubled and free cash flow surged past $10 billion, yet the stock keeps sliding."
"Netflix, Uber, and Novo Nordisk are all excellent, undervalued stocks to buy today."
📈 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 — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for Uber reflects deep methodological disagreements about risk, timing, and valuation. At the optimistic end, Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay see it as a cyclically favorable or non-manic opportunity, while Philip Fisher and Edgar Lawrence Smith highlight exceptional quality and long-term potential—suggesting a 'buy and hold' play. Conversely, the more cautious camp—including Jesse Livermore, Jack Schwager, and Benjamin Graham—flags red flags like trend resistance, liquidity risks, or valuation gaps, dismissing it outright as a speculative or overpriced bet. Even risk-tolerant investors like Howard Marks split between a 'reasonably priced' call and a neutral market-cycle assessment, illustrating how the same stock can be framed as either a contrarian play or a middling cycle participant. The extremes underscore whether one prioritizes growth, quality, or defensive principles.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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)
🟢 88
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 82
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 68
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 67
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 61
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 54
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)
🟡 53
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 51
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 42
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 35
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
🔴 22
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 13
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
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 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.
Medium 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
10.7%
Net Margin
19.3%
EBITDA Margin
12.1%
ROE
37.2%
ROA
16.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.82
Cash
$7.11B
Total Debt
$10.52B
Current Ratio
1.14
Debt/Equity
0.39
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$70.50
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$99.73
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+41.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
17.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 17.7% | $11.49B | $10.55B |
| 2 | 13.9% | $13.09B | $11.02B |
| 3 | 10.1% | $14.42B | $11.13B |
| 4 | 6.3% | $15.33B | $10.86B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $15.71B | $10.21B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$9.76B
Terminal Value
$247.77B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$161.03B
Enterprise Value
$214.80B
Net Debt
$3.42B
Equity Value
$211.39B
*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
$12.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.05
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Uber (UBER) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
UBER currently scores 54/100 (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, UBER's estimated fair value is $99.73, which is 41.5% above the current price of $70.50. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UBER's technical score is 13/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $99.73 vs. price $70.50 (+41.5%); Free cash flow growth: 41.6%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.41 (3y annualized return 14.0% / max drawdown 34.1%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for UBER.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 3 purchases and 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KHOSROWSHAHI DARA | Open Market Purchase | 10.9.2026 | 141,000 | +141,000 | $70.96 |
| Macdonald Andrew | Open Market Purchase | 4.9.2026 | 54,325 | +54,325 | $75.65 |
| Macdonald Andrew | Open Market Purchase | 4.9.2026 | 15,675 | +15,675 | $76.44 |
| Uber Technologies, Inc | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 72,000,000 | -72,000,000 | $6.55 |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,515 | -1,515 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 700 | -700 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 687 | -687 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 2,994 | -2,994 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 708 | -708 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 752 | -752 | $75.95 |
| Ceremony Glen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 341 | -341 | $75.95 |
| Ceremony Glen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 348 | -348 | $75.95 |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,515 | +1,515 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 700 | +700 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 1,485 | -1,485 | $75.95 |
| Ceremony Glen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 352 | -352 | $75.95 |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 687 | +687 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 2,994 | +2,994 | — |
| Ceremony Glen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 708 | +708 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 2,546 | -2,546 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,493 | -1,493 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,465 | -1,465 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,416 | -1,416 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 1,888 | -1,888 | — |
| Hazelbaker Jill | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.8.2026 | 351 | -351 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
45,121,710 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 47,409,310 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 36.4% 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