Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
$10.55
▼ $0.02 (-0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/15 02:58 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$1.77B
Day Range
$10.49 - $10.56
52-Week Range
$9.04 - $16.62
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
DEI is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-36.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 2/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Gross margin
Gross margin: 63.4% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$13.67 vs. price $10.55 (-229.6%)
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
39
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
34
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
10
Risk
36
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
45
Institutional
100
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Douglas Emmett, Inc. has centered on its **Q2 2026 earnings performance**, highlighting **strong leasing momentum** and **financial updates**, including refinancing and leasing activity. Analysts like Cantor Fitzgerald raised the price target to $13 while maintaining a neutral rating. The company also declared a **quarterly cash dividend**, reinforcing investor confidence amid broader market shifts. Discussions emphasized operational stability and strategic growth in its real estate portfolio.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Douglas Emmett, Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
89
Fundamentals
45
Technical
10
Valuation
38
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
Price (3M)
-9%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **anchoring** behavior (score 47) suggests traders are fixated on the 2.6% support level, ignoring weak momentum (-3.4% ROC) and neutral RSI (41). The **narrative-reality gap** (21 points) implies sentiment (98/100) vastly exceeds technical signals, consistent with overvaluation or delayed realization. **Euphoria** (19) and **FOMO** (12) may stem from extreme positive news, while **panic selling** (13) hints at cautious hedging. The key question: *Will traders break the 2.6% anchor, or will sentiment sustain despite weak fundamentals?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 02:46 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Strong Leasing Momentum and..."
"Douglas Emmett (DEI) Q2 FFO and Revenues Top Estimates"
"Douglas Emmett Declares Quarterly Cash Dividend"
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 — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divergent scores reflect deep methodological divides between investors who prioritize technical cycles, market psychology, and fundamental stability. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests the stock’s price action aligns favorably with his oversold/overbought cycle framework, while Charles Mackay’s moderate approval implies it hasn’t yet attracted speculative frenzy. In contrast, the majority of value-oriented and defensive investors—from Benjamin Graham to Gerald Loeb—reject it outright, citing weak valuation, excessive risk, or lack of long-term stability. Meanwhile, efficient-market theorists and trend-followers like Livermore see no clear edge, while Fisher and Lynch dismiss it for failing to meet their growth-and-quality benchmarks. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s price behavior (Nelson/Mackay) or its fundamental or cyclical risks (Graham/Loeb) should dominate the decision.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 68
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 40
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 39
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
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)
🟡 36
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 33
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 31
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 30
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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)
🔴 15
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 3
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)
🔴 2
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 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 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
63.4%
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
1.6%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
0.9%
ROA
0.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.09
Cash
$340.79M
Total Debt
$5.55B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
2.91
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.190 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.190 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.190 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.190 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.190 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.190 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.190 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.190 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.190 |
| 29.6.2025 | $0.190 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.190 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.190 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$10.55
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$13.67
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-229.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
0.4%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.4% | $195.20M | $179.08M |
| 2 | 0.9% | $196.97M | $165.79M |
| 3 | 1.4% | $199.81M | $154.29M |
| 4 | 2.0% | $203.75M | $144.34M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $208.84M | $135.73M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$194.46M
Terminal Value
$3.29B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.14B
Enterprise Value
$2.92B
Net Debt
$5.21B
Equity Value
$-2.29B
*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
$11.37
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$11.35
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 12 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Business Wire · 3.9.2026
Motley Fool · 12.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 8.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
MarketBeat · 6.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 6.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.8.2026
Moby · 5.8.2026
Zacks · 4.8.2026
Zacks · 4.8.2026
Associated Press · 4.8.2026
ChartMill · 4.8.2026
Business Wire · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Zacks · 31.7.2026
Douglas Emmett, Inc. (DEI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, 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.
DEI currently scores 39/100 (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, DEI's estimated fair value is -$13.67, which is 229.6% below the current price of $10.55. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DEI's technical score is 10/100, 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: Gross margin: 63.4% — strong; NAV per share: $11.35.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$13.67 vs. price $10.55 (-229.6%); Calmar: -0.14 (3y annualized return -7.9% / max drawdown 54.8%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -30.8%.
Yes — DEI 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaplan Jordan L | Open Market Purchase | 13.2.2026 | 98,000 | +98,000 | $10.18 |
| Kaplan Jordan L | Open Market Purchase | 13.2.2026 | 2,949,640 | +98,000 | $10.18 |
| Aronson Michele L | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 222,794 | +222,794 | — |
| Panzer Kenneth M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 1,011,140 | +1,011,140 | — |
| CRUMMY KEVIN ANDREW | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 124,251 | +124,251 | — |
| O HERN THOMAS E | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,780 | +20,780 | — |
| MCFERRAN VIRGINIA | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,138 | +20,138 | — |
| Dominguez Dorene | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| SIMON WILLIAM E JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| SEYMOUR PETER | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 214,225 | +214,225 | — |
| Kaplan Jordan L | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 1,011,140 | +1,011,140 | — |
| Wang Shirley | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| Bider Leslie E | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,138 | +20,138 | — |
| O HERN THOMAS E | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,780 | +20,780 | — |
| Bider Leslie E | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,138 | +20,138 | — |
| Panzer Kenneth M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 1,011,140 | +1,011,140 | — |
| Kaplan Jordan L | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 1,011,140 | +1,011,140 | — |
| Dominguez Dorene | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| SIMON WILLIAM E JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| CRUMMY KEVIN ANDREW | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 124,251 | +124,251 | — |
| MCFERRAN VIRGINIA | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 20,138 | +20,138 | — |
| SEYMOUR PETER | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 214,225 | +214,225 | — |
| Wang Shirley | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 18,852 | +18,852 | — |
| Aronson Michele L | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 222,794 | +222,794 | — |
| Panzer Kenneth M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.12.2025 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
29,724,365 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 28,292,775 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
45.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.9% 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