Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Communication Services · ·
$22.74
▼ $0.17 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 09:59 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$46.91B
Day Range
$22.36 - $22.91
52-Week Range
$21.28 - $32.86
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$21.28
Resistance
$27.35
CMCSA is a stock from the Communication Services sector — Telecom, media, and internet/social platforms — revenue from advertising and subscriptions.
-23.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/30 factors positiveRisk: High
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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $90.08 vs. price $22.74 (+296.1%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
73/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
+2.2%
Median 40D Outcome
77/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
60%
+4.7% … +8.7%
🟡 Base
27%
-0.2% … +0.2%
🔴 Bearish
13%
-5.5% … -4.3%
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, 60% (95% CI 36%–80%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +4.7%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
4 occurrence(s) · 75% 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 | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.2% | +0.3% … +3.9% | +0.1% |
| 10D | 73% (48%–89%) | +3.5% | +1.1% … +5.5% | +0.3% |
| 20D | 60% (36%–80%) | +4.7% | +0.0% … +6.8% | +0.2% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.2% | -2.7% … +9.5% | -0.0% |
| 60D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.8% | -4.6% … +10.6% | +0.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-05-03 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +8.8% | -7.1% |
| 2025-07-30 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +4.0% | -9.8% |
| 2025-02-03 | 68/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +7.0% | +3.0% |
| 2025-09-22 | 66/100 | Downtrend | -6.1% | -5.6% |
| 2018-05-08 | 65/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +5.5% | +13.2% |
| 2026-06-04 | 64/100 | Downtrend | +0.2% | +14.1% |
| 2018-12-24 | 64/100 | Downtrend | +9.6% | +19.3% |
| 2025-04-08 | 63/100 | Downtrend | +4.7% | +7.9% |
| 2021-12-09 | 63/100 | Downtrend | +4.7% | -3.5% |
| 2018-03-22 | 63/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -0.1% | -2.0% |
| 2026-05-12 | 62/100 | High Volatility | -3.7% | +1.8% |
| 2024-12-19 | 62/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -0.8% | -2.4% |
| 2022-06-21 | 62/100 | Downtrend | +8.7% | -11.6% |
| 2026-06-22 | 61/100 | Downtrend | +6.7% | +6.3% |
| 2025-11-03 | 60/100 | Downtrend | +0.1% | +17.7% |
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 XLC (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
47
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 23, 2026
Then
63
$26.85
Now
47
$22.74
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
68
Quality
47
Value
67
Momentum
6
Risk
40
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
64
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING CMCSA...
Recent media coverage of Comcast (CMCSA) has primarily focused on its **broadband expansion initiatives**, with reports highlighting progress in projects like the Jackson County, Michigan buildout and multi-state deployments in Utah, Indiana, and Ohio. Meanwhile, financial analysis notes the company’s **stock valuation**, which, despite a 43.8% decline over five years, is considered relatively undervalued compared to historical and peer benchmarks. The discussion also touches on investor skepticism about Comcast’s long-term growth prospects amid market pessimism.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Comcast. News trend score: 56. Reason: 7 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
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
40
Fundamentals
64
Technical
6
Valuation
67
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+1%
Market Narrative
22
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
-15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior reflects relative underperformance today (-0.6% vs. peers), with traders likely aligning with broader sector trends rather than fundamentals. Extreme positive sentiment (100/100) contrasts with weak momentum (-1.1% ROC), suggesting narrative-driven alignment rather than conviction. The narrative gap (+13) and confirmation bias (score 17) imply selective attention to positive narratives despite stagnant fundamentals. The key question: will traders continue herding or pivot if peers diverge further? The absence of panic or euphoria suggests a cautious, consensus-driven environment.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:26 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Comcast reports that more than half of its large-scale network build in Jackson County, Michigan is now complete... targeting thousands of unserved and underserved homes and businesses."
"Comcast stock has had a tough five year stretch, yet on current checks it still screens as relatively cheap compared with its own history and peers."
"Over the past 5 years Comcast shareholders have seen the stock fall about 43.8%."
📈 8D 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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 26/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock divides historical methodologies sharply, with Graham’s defensive and enterprising frameworks offering the most bullish takes—scoring 85 and 59, respectively—because they prioritize undervaluation and margin of safety. Meanwhile, Lynch (75) and Veblen (71) see growth potential, either because the price hasn’t matched fundamentals or because the business aligns with real economic value. However, the more cautious voices—like Marks (62), Smith (59), and Loeb (51)—warn of overvaluation or cyclical risks, questioning whether the stock’s strengths justify the premium. At the other extreme, Fisher (44) and Bagehot (39) dismiss it outright, either for lacking his signature quality or for exposing systemic liquidity risks, while Livermore (51) and Schwager (42) see no clear edge at all.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 99
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 85
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 84
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 77
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 75
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 72
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 62
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 59
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 59
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)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 44
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 39
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
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)
🔴 26
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 · 11 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 downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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
16.7%
Net Margin
16.2%
EBITDA Margin
29.8%
ROE
20.6%
ROA
7.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$5.41
Cash
$9.48B
Total Debt
$5.96B
Current Ratio
0.88
Debt/Equity
0.06
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 1.7.2026 | $0.330 |
| 30.6.2026 | $0.330 |
| 1.4.2026 | $0.330 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.330 |
| 14.1.2026 | $0.330 |
| 13.1.2026 | $0.330 |
| 1.10.2025 | $0.309 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.309 |
| 2.7.2025 | $0.309 |
| 1.7.2025 | $0.309 |
| 2.4.2025 | $0.309 |
| 1.4.2025 | $0.309 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$22.74
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$90.08
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+296.1%
🟢 Appears cheap 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% | $22.03B | $20.21B |
| 2 | 1.1% | $22.27B | $18.74B |
| 3 | 1.6% | $22.62B | $17.47B |
| 4 | 2.0% | $23.08B | $16.35B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $23.66B | $15.37B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$21.89B
Terminal Value
$373.03B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$242.44B
Enterprise Value
$330.59B
Net Debt
$-3.52B
Equity Value
$334.11B
*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
$26.13
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.54
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 7 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Comcast (CMCSA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
CMCSA currently scores 47/100 (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, CMCSA's estimated fair value is $90.08, which is 296.1% above the current price of $22.74. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CMCSA's technical score is 6/100, 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: $90.08 vs. price $22.74 (+296.1%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 30.2%; Free cash flow growth: 41.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.88; Calmar: -0.38 (3y annualized return -19.1% / max drawdown 49.9%).
Yes — CMCSA 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | Gift | 2.9.2026 | 101,900 | -101,900 | — |
| Cavanagh Michael J | I | 1.9.2026 | 565,642 | -565,642 | $26.30 |
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | I | 1.9.2026 | 382,860 | -382,860 | $26.30 |
| Cavanagh Michael J | I | 1.9.2026 | 392,769.065 | -392,769.065 | $26.30 |
| BREEN EDWARD D | Gift | 17.8.2026 | 62,440 | -62,440 | — |
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | Gift | 5.8.2026 | 204,100 | -204,100 | — |
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | Gift | 5.8.2026 | 5,493,726 | -204,100 | — |
| Baltimore Thomas J Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,375 | +1,375 | — |
| BREEN EDWARD D | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 815 | +815 | — |
| Brady Louise F. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,375 | +1,375 | — |
| Honickman Jeffrey A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,783 | +1,783 | — |
| Smith Gordon | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,375 | +1,375 | — |
| Baltimore Thomas J Jr | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 41,257 | +1,375 | — |
| Brady Louise F. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 34,770 | +1,375 | — |
| BREEN EDWARD D | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 89,777 | +815 | — |
| Honickman Jeffrey A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 271,784 | +1,783 | — |
| Smith Gordon | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 10,522 | +1,375 | — |
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | Gift | 19.5.2026 | 202,500 | -202,500 | — |
| ROBERTS BRIAN L | Gift | 19.5.2026 | 5,697,826 | -202,500 | — |
| BREEN EDWARD D | Gift | 11.5.2026 | 32,440 | +32,440 | — |
| BREEN EDWARD D | Gift | 11.5.2026 | 88,962 | +32,440 | — |
| Murdock Daniel C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.4.2026 | 5,268 | -5,268 | — |
| Murdock Daniel C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.4.2026 | 2,073 | -2,073 | $27.93 |
| Murdock Daniel C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.4.2026 | 5,268 | +5,268 | — |
| Murdock Daniel C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.4.2026 | 64,435 | +5,268 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
82,965,352 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 72,592,374 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
42.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.1% 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