Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Utilities · ·
$261.30
▲ $1.77 (+0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/17 02:36 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$260.31 - $267.55
52-Week Range
$228.63 - $412.70
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
CEG is a stock from the Utilities sector — Electricity, water, and residential gas — steady demand and heavy regulation, considered a defensive, dividend-paying sector.
-19.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 125.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $51.61 vs. price $261.30 (-80.3%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
78/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
-1.8%
Median 40D Outcome
2/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+3.7% … +25.1%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.5% … +0.5%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-9.3% … -4.7%
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, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +1.3%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 100% 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 | 73% (48%–89%) | +4.7% | +1.8% … +7.8% | +0.7% |
| 10D | 73% (48%–89%) | +4.9% | +0.1% … +8.2% | +0.9% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.3% | -5.1% … +9.4% | +2.1% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | -1.8% | -6.3% … +19.7% | +4.5% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -2.5% | -10.2% … +16.4% | +8.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-23 | 78/100 | High Volatility | -4.2% | -7.8% |
| 2026-05-14 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -7.8% | +1.1% |
| 2026-04-21 | 73/100 | Downtrend | -6.1% | -9.1% |
| 2023-02-27 | 72/100 | Consolidation | -4.0% | +7.2% |
| 2024-09-04 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +49.5% | +42.7% |
| 2026-01-07 | 72/100 | Consolidation | -27.0% | -18.7% |
| 2025-08-19 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +1.3% | +11.6% |
| 2023-03-23 | 71/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +4.3% | +25.3% |
| 2025-11-18 | 71/100 | Consolidation | +0.5% | -10.7% |
| 2026-06-11 | 70/100 | Downtrend | +4.4% | +21.2% |
| 2026-04-07 | 69/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +17.6% | -12.2% |
| 2024-12-19 | 68/100 | Consolidation | +47.7% | -2.5% |
| 2024-01-16 | 68/100 | Consolidation | +14.4% | +72.5% |
| 2025-12-17 | 68/100 | Consolidation | -9.8% | -9.8% |
| 2025-10-22 | 67/100 | Uptrend | +2.1% | -15.6% |
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 XLU (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
43
Today
62
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 18, 2026
Then
62
$276.49
Now
43
$261.30
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
48
Quality
58
Value
33
Momentum
13
Risk
56
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
59
Institutional
100
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING CEG...
Recent media coverage of Constellation Energy has centered on its nuclear energy sector focus, particularly in comparisons with rival Vistra. Analysts debate whether Constellation’s larger nuclear platform or Vistra’s valuation and growth potential makes it the better investment. The company’s stock performance—including underperformance against the Dow—has been noted, alongside broader discussions on nuclear stocks amid market volatility and AI-driven energy demand shifts. No major company-specific developments beyond these financial and industry comparisons are highlighted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Constellation Energy. News trend score: 68. Reason: 7 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
23
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
59
Technical
13
Valuation
33
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
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.
Price (3M)
-5%
Market Narrative
57
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s extreme anchoring (95) reflects fixation on resistance, while euphoria and overconfidence—evidenced by extreme valuation and momentum—suggest investors may be overestimating upside potential. FOMO and herding are secondary, indicating limited peer-driven urgency. The dominant narrative-reality gap (42) hints at detached expectations, but the key question remains: will traders break resistance or double down on anchored price targets?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:23 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Constellation Energy has the bigger nuclear platform, but Vistra's valuation and growth catalysts keep the race close."
"Constellation Energy has underperformed the Dow over the past year"
"the stocks that made investors rich in the last leg may not be the ones that do it in the next one"
📈 14D 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 — 94/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 14/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with scores ranging from a bullish 73 under Edgar Lawrence Smith’s ‘buy and hold for a decade’ framework to a bearish 3 under Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle analysis. Smith’s high score reflects his long-term, patient approach, where even modest growth over time could justify holding, while Nelson’s extreme caution suggests the stock’s momentum may be unsustainable. Fisher, Housel, and Livermore—all leaning toward moderate quality—agree it’s not exceptional but could be tolerable for disciplined investors, whereas Graham’s strict valuation and defensive criteria outright reject it. Meanwhile, the efficient-market camp and Schwager’s systematic wizards dismiss it as unconvincing, while Marks flags valuation risks and Mackay warns of speculative crowd behavior. The contrast highlights whether this stock is a slow-growth hold (Smith) or a speculative gamble (Nelson), with most methodologies landing in the cautious middle.
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 77
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 73
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 61
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 55
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 51
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 38
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 17
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 14
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 300 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 uptrend 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
12.1%
Net Margin
9.1%
EBITDA Margin
22.3%
ROE
16.0%
ROA
4.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.40
Cash
$3.64B
Total Debt
$7.34B
Current Ratio
1.53
Debt/Equity
0.51
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 18.8.2026 | $0.427 |
| 15.5.2026 | $0.427 |
| 14.5.2026 | $0.427 |
| 9.3.2026 | $0.427 |
| 8.3.2026 | $0.427 |
| 17.11.2025 | $0.388 |
| 16.11.2025 | $0.388 |
| 18.8.2025 | $0.388 |
| 17.8.2025 | $0.388 |
| 16.5.2025 | $0.388 |
| 15.5.2025 | $0.388 |
| 7.3.2025 | $0.388 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$261.30
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$51.61
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-80.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
1.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.6% | $1.31B | $1.20B |
| 2 | 1.8% | $1.33B | $1.12B |
| 3 | 2.1% | $1.36B | $1.05B |
| 4 | 2.3% | $1.39B | $985.85M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.43B | $927.06M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.29B
Terminal Value
$22.49B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$14.62B
Enterprise Value
$19.91B
Net Debt
$3.70B
Equity Value
$16.20B
*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
$46.23
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$44.25
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 9 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 14.9.2026
Constellation Energy (CEG) 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.
CEG 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, CEG's estimated fair value is $51.61, which is 80.3% below the current price of $261.30. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CEG'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: Free cash flow growth: 125.6%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 1.53.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $51.61 vs. price $261.30 (-80.3%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -37.8%; Net income growth: -38.1%.
Yes — CEG 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 — 2 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRANDALL ROGER W | Open Market Purchase | 11.8.2026 | 1,500 | +1,500 | $278.62 |
| CRANDALL ROGER W | Open Market Purchase | 11.8.2026 | 1,693 | +1,500 | $278.62 |
| CRANDALL ROGER W | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 462 | +462 | $267.25 |
| CRANDALL ROGER W | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 462 | +462 | $267.25 |
| Harrington Charles L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 146 | +146 | $248.37 |
| Harrington Charles L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 5,345 | +146 | $248.37 |
| DE BALMANN YVES C | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Halverson Bradley M | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Harrington Charles L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Holzrichter Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Jamil Dhiaa M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Ashish Khandpur K | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| LAWLESS ROBERT J | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Richardson John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Paterson Eileen P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Rimmer Nneka Louise | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 556 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Richardson John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 16,399 | +556 | $305.71 |
| LAWLESS ROBERT J | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 51,340 | +556 | $305.71 |
| DE BALMANN YVES C | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 51,340 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Halverson Bradley M | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 6,257 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Holzrichter Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 6,257 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Jamil Dhiaa M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 1,705 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Harrington Charles L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 1,555 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Ashish Khandpur K | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 6,257 | +556 | $305.71 |
| Paterson Eileen P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 1,555 | +556 | $305.71 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
11,572,494 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,429,475 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
57.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.4% 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