Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$253.71
▲ $2.52 (+1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 07:34 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$2.74T
Day Range
$251.88 - $255.43
52-Week Range
$196.00 - $287.20
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$226.16
Resistance
$287.20
AMZN is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+9.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/28 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 29.7%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (71/100), 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.
86/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
92/100
Analog Quality
+2.6%
Median 40D Outcome
65/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+2.2% … +6.8%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.3% … +0.3%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-11.9% … -2.3%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 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 +2.2%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
1 occurrence(s) · 0% 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 | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.5% | -1.8% … +3.6% | +0.5% |
| 10D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.8% | -3.1% … +4.9% | +1.1% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.2% | -0.8% … +6.0% | +2.4% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.6% | -7.7% … +7.1% | +3.6% |
| 60D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.2% | -2.5% … +8.5% | +5.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-09-28 | 86/100 | Consolidation | +1.7% | +22.2% |
| 2021-12-22 | 85/100 | Consolidation | -16.6% | -5.6% |
| 2026-01-22 | 84/100 | Consolidation | -10.3% | +5.9% |
| 2021-01-04 | 84/100 | Consolidation | +6.1% | -2.9% |
| 2022-01-11 | 83/100 | Downtrend | -2.5% | -4.6% |
| 2019-05-28 | 83/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +2.3% | -0.7% |
| 2025-12-18 | 83/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +1.9% | -7.4% |
| 2023-08-03 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +7.1% | -0.9% |
| 2020-12-14 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +0.3% | -2.1% |
| 2021-02-23 | 82/100 | Consolidation | -1.8% | +1.2% |
| 2025-10-22 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +2.2% | +6.0% |
| 2021-10-07 | 81/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +5.3% | +3.2% |
| 2023-10-24 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +11.9% | +20.4% |
| 2025-06-23 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +9.1% | +11.1% |
| 2025-08-08 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +5.9% | +14.1% |
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 XLY (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
58
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
4d ago · $248.52
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -8 to 18 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
5d ago · $255.71
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 20 to -7 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
28d ago · $258.63
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
28d ago · $258.63
Evidence: 5 bullish / 6 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $264.47
Evidence: attention score 63/100
What happened after
31d ago · $259.45
Evidence: 5 bullish / 5 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $260.68
Evidence: 6 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
67
$261.70
Now
58
$253.71
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
71
Quality
63
Value
45
Momentum
44
Risk
56
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
68
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING AMZN...
Recent media coverage of Amazon has centered on its expanding role in AI-driven infrastructure and innovation, with headlines highlighting partnerships like ADP’s collaboration with AWS to advance AI in human capital management and Qualcomm’s multi-generational product alliance to develop next-gen AI data centers. Additionally, Amazon’s foray into pet health products, such as Jaguar Health’s *Neonorm Dog*, was noted. While broader industry trends—such as AI’s impact on data centers and retail—were discussed, Amazon itself was not the direct focus of these analyses. Investigative reports briefly mention an ongoing probe into an Amazon cargo plane crash.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Amazon. News trend score: 68. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🏛️ 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 — 80/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 8/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This debate reveals a stark divide between methodologies that emphasize growth potential and those focused on valuation or defensive metrics. On one end, Mackay’s high score suggests no obvious speculative bubble, while Nelson, Housel, Lynch, and Marks all see AMZN as a strong growth or cyclically favorable candidate—aligning with their principles of patient holding or undervalued momentum. Meanwhile, Fisher and Veblen, though more cautious, still acknowledge some alignment between growth and real value, though not exceptional. Conversely, the lowest-scoring frameworks—Graham’s strict criteria, Schwager’s disciplined trading rules, and Livermore’s trend-following approach—reject AMZN outright, viewing it as either overpriced, illiquid, or contrary to core principles. The middle-ground methods (Bagehot, Malkiel/Bogle) are skeptical, flagging risks like liquidity concerns or weak evidence for active picking, while Marks’ cycle analysis sits ambivalently in the middle. The contrast underscores whether AMZN’s growth justifies its valuation or if its risks outweigh its rewards under different frameworks.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 80
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 75
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 73
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)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 63
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 58
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 55
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 43
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 40
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 31
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
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 8
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 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 5 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 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
50.3%
Operating Margin
11.2%
Net Margin
10.8%
EBITDA Margin
20.3%
ROE
18.9%
ROA
9.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.29
Cash
$86.81B
Total Debt
$68.40B
Current Ratio
1.05
Debt/Equity
0.17
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$37.97
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$34.97
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 5 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Amazon (AMZN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, 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.
AMZN currently scores 58/100 (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.
AMZN's technical score is 44/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 29.7%; Net income growth: 31.1%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; P/E: 35.4.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AMZN.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMITH BRAD D | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2026 | 4,086 | +4,086 | — |
| Mandia Kevin R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2026 | 4,086 | +4,086 | — |
| Herrington Douglas J | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $254.77 |
| BEZOS JEFFREY P | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 230,637 | -230,637 | — |
| BEZOS JEFFREY P | Gift | 26.8.2026 | 879,323,424 | -230,637 | — |
| BEZOS JEFFREY P | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 184,943 | -184,943 | — |
| BEZOS JEFFREY P | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 879,554,061 | -184,943 | — |
| Zapolsky David | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 9,258 | -9,258 | $259.77 |
| Zapolsky David | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 41,190 | -9,258 | $259.77 |
| Olsavsky Brian T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 9,900 | -9,900 | — |
| Reynolds Shelley | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 1,800 | +1,800 | — |
| Reynolds Shelley | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 888 | -888 | $260.33 |
| Zapolsky David | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 5,530 | -5,530 | — |
| Zapolsky David | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 9,900 | -9,900 | — |
| Olsavsky Brian T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 5,530 | +5,530 | — |
| Zapolsky David | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 2,133 | -2,133 | $259.63 |
| Reynolds Shelley | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 543 | +543 | — |
| Reynolds Shelley | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 675 | -675 | $257.77 |
| Olsavsky Brian T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 5,530 | -5,530 | — |
| Zapolsky David | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 1,119 | -1,119 | $260.45 |
| Reynolds Shelley | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 1,800 | -1,800 | — |
| Reynolds Shelley | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 543 | -543 | — |
| Reynolds Shelley | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 780 | -780 | $258.58 |
| Olsavsky Brian T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 9,900 | +9,900 | — |
| Zapolsky David | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 1,782 | -1,782 | $258.64 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
92,067,423 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 98,434,174 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
37.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 31.1% 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