Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$98.77
▼ $3.58 (-3.5%)
Market data updated: 09/17 07:40 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$70.51B
Day Range
$98.15 - $102.08
52-Week Range
$82.00 - $122.41
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
UPS is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+21.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 2.0% of price
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $54.42 vs. price $98.77 (-44.9%)
Fair Value
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
43
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
26
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
28
Risk
50
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
57
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING UPS...
Recent media coverage of **United Parcel Service (UPS)** has been limited and focused on minor financial and corporate updates. The most notable points include a slight stock dip of **1.17%** on a trading day, along with a brief mention of former UPS Chief Accounting Officer **Patti Humble** joining the **Exceptional Women Alliance**. The rest of the headlines pertain to **Annex Brands, Inc.**, a separate company, regarding franchise ownership transitions and new locations for its **PostalAnnex** shipping services, which are unrelated to UPS. No substantive UPS-specific news beyond these details is present.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about United Parcel Service. News trend score: 86. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
57
Technical
28
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-3%
Market Narrative
67
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+31
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
UPS’s psychology is dominated by anchoring, as the stock trades mere ticks above a critical support level, suggesting traders are fixating on this near-term reference point. The narrative gap (+39) and confirmation bias (score 51) imply investors may be selectively emphasizing positive narratives despite stagnant fundamentals. Herding (score 57) hints at relative underperformance, but not extreme deviation, while FOMO and panic are effectively neutralized by weak momentum and high sentiment. The key open question: *Will traders hold near support, or will the 0.9% proximity to it trigger liquidation?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:31 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"United Parcel Service (UPS) stood at $102.29, denoting a -1.17% move from the preceding trading day."
📈 12D 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 — 64/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for UPS reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors assess risk, valuation, and market psychology. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests he sees a cyclical opportunity near an oversold trough, while the majority—including Graham, Fisher, and Lynch—reject the stock outright, citing either poor defensive traits, lack of quality growth, or overvaluation. Meanwhile, the efficient-market camp (Malkiel/Bogle) and Marks’ cycle analysis sit in the middle, questioning whether active selection adds meaningful value, whereas cautionary voices like Loeb, Bagehot, and Morgan Housel flag systemic risks like volatility, liquidity concerns, or structural instability. Even swing traders like Livermore and Veblen are skeptical, with the former dismissing the trend and the latter doubting profitability, while Mackay and Schwager’s lukewarm signals hint at speculative crowd behavior without clear conviction.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 64
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟡 64
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 61
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 58
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 41
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 34
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 30
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 25
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 24
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)
🔴 19
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 18
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 8
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 7
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 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 7 bearish · 2 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
8.9%
Net Margin
6.3%
EBITDA Margin
12.3%
ROE
34.3%
ROA
7.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.56
Cash
$5.89B
Total Debt
$24.19B
Current Ratio
1.22
Debt/Equity
1.49
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 17.8.2026 | $1.640 |
| 18.5.2026 | $1.640 |
| 17.5.2026 | $1.640 |
| 17.2.2026 | $1.640 |
| 16.2.2026 | $1.640 |
| 17.11.2025 | $1.640 |
| 16.11.2025 | $1.640 |
| 18.8.2025 | $1.640 |
| 17.8.2025 | $1.640 |
| 19.5.2025 | $1.640 |
| 18.5.2025 | $1.640 |
| 18.2.2025 | $1.640 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$98.77
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$54.42
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-44.9%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-4.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -4.0% | $4.58B | $4.20B |
| 2 | -2.3% | $4.47B | $3.76B |
| 3 | -0.7% | $4.44B | $3.43B |
| 4 | 0.9% | $4.48B | $3.17B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $4.59B | $2.98B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$4.76B
Terminal Value
$72.35B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$47.02B
Enterprise Value
$64.56B
Net Debt
$18.31B
Equity Value
$46.25B
*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
$19.09
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$7.49
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
PR Newswire · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
PR Newswire · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
PR Newswire · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
United Parcel Service (UPS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, 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.
UPS currently scores 43/100 (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, UPS's estimated fair value is $54.42, which is 44.9% below the current price of $98.77. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UPS's technical score is 28/100, 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: ATR: 2.0% of price; Return on equity (ROE): 34.3% — strong; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $54.42 vs. price $98.77 (-44.9%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.28 (3y annualized return -13.6% / max drawdown 49.3%).
Yes — UPS 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subramanian Bala | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 29,223 | +29,223 | — |
| Ramos Wilfredo | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 5,413 | +5,413 | — |
| Cesarone Nando | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 58,446 | +58,446 | — |
| Cesarone Nando | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,551.581 | -3,551.581 | — |
| Dykes Brian M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,137.501 | -3,137.501 | — |
| Cesarone Nando | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,551.581 | +3,551.581 | — |
| Guffey Matthew W | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,189 | -1,189 | $100.78 |
| Gutmann Kathleen M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,582 | -1,582 | $100.78 |
| Ford Darrell L | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 969 | -969 | $100.78 |
| Cesarone Nando | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,582 | -1,582 | $100.78 |
| Gutmann Kathleen M. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,551.581 | +3,551.581 | — |
| Subramanian Bala | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,086.297 | -3,086.297 | — |
| Dykes Brian M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,137.501 | +3,137.501 | — |
| Gutmann Kathleen M. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,551.581 | -3,551.581 | — |
| Dykes Brian M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,398 | -1,398 | $100.78 |
| Guffey Matthew W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,667.834 | -2,667.834 | — |
| Subramanian Bala | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 3,086.297 | +3,086.297 | — |
| Brothers Norman M. Jr | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,116 | -1,116 | $100.78 |
| Brothers Norman M. Jr | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,504.804 | -2,504.804 | — |
| Ford Darrell L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,174.223 | +2,174.223 | — |
| Brothers Norman M. Jr | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,504.804 | +2,504.804 | — |
| Guffey Matthew W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,667.834 | +2,667.834 | — |
| Subramanian Bala | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.5.2026 | 1,027 | -1,027 | $100.78 |
| Ford Darrell L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 2,174.223 | -2,174.223 | — |
| Brothers Norman M. Jr | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 26,222 | +2,505 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
25,339,039 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 23,812,182 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
64.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 65.7% 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