Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$156.47
▲ $0.13 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/19 10:00 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$44.11B
Day Range
$154.60 - $156.73
52-Week Range
$108.35 - $163.75
Beta
—
Next Earnings
23.11.2026
Support
$125.00
Resistance
$163.75
A is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+22.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 21/32 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
🟢 Bullish
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
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: $55.50 vs. price $156.47 (-64.5%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
82/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+0.4%
Median 40D Outcome
65/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+3.7% … +6.7%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.7% … +0.7%
🔴 Bearish
47%
-9.3% … -4.2%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.7%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
10 occurrence(s) · 50% 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 | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.1% | -2.9% … +2.3% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.3% | -4.7% … +3.9% | +0.9% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.7% | -7.1% … +4.3% | +1.5% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.4% | -9.0% … +11.0% | +2.6% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.1% | -10.3% … +10.9% | +3.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-17 | 82/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -1.5% | -9.1% |
| 2020-12-02 | 82/100 | Uptrend | +3.4% | +7.9% |
| 2018-02-21 | 81/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -2.6% | -10.8% |
| 2021-02-17 | 80/100 | Uptrend | -5.8% | -0.1% |
| 2020-07-06 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +11.0% | +12.2% |
| 2025-11-28 | 80/100 | Uptrend | -10.1% | -21.2% |
| 2020-11-09 | 78/100 | Uptrend | +4.0% | +9.5% |
| 2020-09-15 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +5.0% | +16.0% |
| 2020-09-30 | 76/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +0.7% | +16.2% |
| 2018-03-09 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -8.4% | -10.7% |
| 2019-01-10 | 76/100 | Uptrend | +8.4% | +16.9% |
| 2024-05-09 | 75/100 | Consolidation | -8.4% | -6.1% |
| 2025-11-05 | 75/100 | Uptrend | +1.1% | -10.0% |
| 2024-03-01 | 75/100 | Uptrend | +4.7% | +6.6% |
| 2026-01-09 | 73/100 | Uptrend | -14.2% | -21.3% |
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 XLV (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
70
Today
69
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🔎 What Changed (vs. 30 days ago)
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
25d ago · $154.89
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
25d ago · $154.89
Evidence: 11 bullish / 0 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
25d ago · $153.51
Evidence: 1.5x recent average volume
What happened after
25d ago · $153.43
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
25d ago · $153.43
Evidence: 11 bullish / 0 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
26d ago · $154.55
Evidence: -3.9pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
26d ago · $159.00
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
26d ago · $159.00
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
27d ago · $159.00
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
27d ago · $159.00
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
28d ago · $159.00
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
28d ago · $159.00
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $154.52
Evidence: +4.4pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $154.52
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
31d ago · $154.52
Evidence: 9 bullish / 3 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $148.51
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
32d ago · $148.51
Evidence: 9 bullish / 3 bearish technical signals agreeing
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 18, 2026
Then
69
$147.80
Now
70
$156.47
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
50
Quality
63
Value
38
Momentum
89
Risk
54
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
83
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING A...
Recent coverage of Agilent Technologies has centered on its leadership’s appearance at the J.P. Morgan U.S. All Stars Conference, where CEO Padraig McDonnell and CFO Adam Elinoff took part in a fireside chat. Analysts have noted the stock’s moderate outperformance of the Dow over the past year, while an UBS downgrade sparked a share‑price decline. The company’s news also appeared alongside broader reports of a softer healthcare sector and a global transcriptome‑sequencing market outlook.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Agilent Technologies. 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
41
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
51
Fundamentals
83
Technical
89
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+23%
Market Narrative
76
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+34
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peers’ downward moves, as evidenced by the stock’s slight underperformance relative to its sector. High sentiment (98/100) contrasts with negative momentum, indicating a disconnect where euphoria and overconfidence persist despite technical weakness. The narrative gap (27 points) further implies traders may be overestimating fundamentals relative to current price action. The key question is whether this synchronized selling will persist or if a divergence emerges as sentiment remains elevated. The absence of panic selling as a dominant state suggests traders are not yet acting on extreme distress, but herding could amplify volatility if external catalysts emerge.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:50 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Agilent Technologies Inc. (NYSE: A) today announced the U.S. launch of the Agilent S540MD Slide Scanner System, a whole slide imaging (WSI) digital scanner, following FDA clearance."
"Agilent (A) Upgraded to Buy: What Does It Mean for the Stock? — Agilent (A) might move higher on growing optimism about its earnings prospects"
📈 19D 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
Edgar Lawrence Smith — 72/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing it as a compelling opportunity while others flag it as risky or overvalued. The highest-scoring approaches—Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle analysis, Edgar Lawrence Smith’s long-term hold strategy, and Walter Bagehot’s liquidity focus—all suggest it’s undervalued or resilient in downturns, with Nelson even calling it closer to oversold than overbought. In contrast, the more conservative or market-skeptical frameworks, like Benjamin Graham’s defensive criteria, Peter Lynch’s growth-at-a-reasonable-price rule, and Howard Marks’ risk/valuation warnings, uniformly dismiss it as overpriced or volatile, with Marks specifically noting late-cycle caution. Even the efficient-market proponents see little evidence to justify picking it over an index, while Fisher and Lynch’s quality/growth filters further exclude it. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s technical or liquidity strengths outweigh its valuation or cyclical risks—something that depends entirely on the investor’s core philosophy.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 72
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 71
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 63
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 61
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)
🟡 52
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 52
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 42
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 39
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 38
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 38
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 26
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 21
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 13
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 an uptrend (10 bullish · 1 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.
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
52.4%
Operating Margin
21.3%
Net Margin
18.8%
EBITDA Margin
25.4%
ROE
19.3%
ROA
10.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.59
Cash
$1.79B
Total Debt
$3.35B
Current Ratio
1.96
Debt/Equity
0.50
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.255 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.255 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.255 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.255 |
| 6.1.2026 | $0.255 |
| 5.1.2026 | $0.255 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.248 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.248 |
| 1.7.2025 | $0.248 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.248 |
| 1.4.2025 | $0.248 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.248 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$156.47
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$55.50
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-64.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
0.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.6% | $1.16B | $1.06B |
| 2 | 1.1% | $1.17B | $985.82M |
| 3 | 1.5% | $1.19B | $918.41M |
| 4 | 2.0% | $1.21B | $859.63M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.24B | $808.37M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.15B
Terminal Value
$19.61B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$12.75B
Enterprise Value
$17.38B
Net Debt
$1.56B
Equity Value
$15.82B
*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
$23.65
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$6.40
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Barchart · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Agilent Technologies (A) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 70/100, rated "Strong". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
A currently scores 70/100 (Strong) 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, A's estimated fair value is $55.50, which is 64.5% below the current price of $156.47. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
A's technical score is 89/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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; Debt/equity: 0.50; Current ratio: 1.96.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $55.50 vs. price $156.47 (-64.5%); Calmar: 0.33 (3y annualized return 11.7% / max drawdown 35.8%); Free cash flow growth: -16.1%.
Yes — A 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 3 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boehnlein Glenn S | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2026 | 817 | +817 | $146.85 |
| Dolsten Mikael | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 634 | -634 | $151.38 |
| KIRKWOOD JONAH PREVOST | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.6.2026 | 30 | -30 | $136.01 |
| MCDONNELL PADRAIG | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.6.2026 | 418 | -418 | $137.40 |
| MCDONNELL PADRAIG | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.6.2026 | 65,842 | -418 | $137.40 |
| Dolsten Mikael | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 1,600 | -1,600 | $135.42 |
| Dolsten Mikael | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 5,548 | -1,600 | $135.42 |
| Buckner Michael Steven | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 8,872 | +8,872 | — |
| Buckner Michael Steven | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.5.2026 | 8,887 | +8,872 | — |
| MAY SIMON | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 368 | -368 | $115.62 |
| MAY SIMON | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 14,015 | -368 | $115.62 |
| Henson Meghan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.3.2026 | 153 | -153 | $113.98 |
| Henson Meghan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.3.2026 | 6,890 | -153 | $113.98 |
| Brown Judy L | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| Dolsten Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| KOH BOON HWEE | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.3.2026 | 648 | -648 | $111.75 |
| KOH BOON HWEE | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| Podolsky Daniel K | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| WILSON DOW R | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| Soriot Pascal | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| Soriot Pascal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.3.2026 | 648 | -648 | $111.75 |
| SCANGOS GEORGE A | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 1,057 | +1,057 | $111.75 |
| BRAWLEY OTIS W | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 888 | +888 | $111.75 |
| SCANGOS GEORGE A | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
| BRAWLEY OTIS W | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.3.2026 | 2,158 | +2,158 | $111.75 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,677,007 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 5,749,623 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
68.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 54.9% 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