Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$247.08
▼ $0.00 (-0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/17 08:42 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$27.27B
Day Range
$244.85 - $248.57
52-Week Range
$171.18 - $248.65
Beta
—
Next Earnings
19.10.2026
DGX 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.
+37.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/32 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 49.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $149.94 vs. price $247.08 (-39.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (73/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
76/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
+1.2%
Median 40D Outcome
73/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
20%
+4.1% … +4.9%
🟡 Base
20%
-0.4% … +0.4%
🔴 Bearish
60%
-7.3% … -3.6%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 10 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 20% (95% CI 7%–45%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -3.2%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
14 occurrence(s) · 21% 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 | 20% (7%–45%) | -2.1% | -3.7% … -0.4% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 20% (7%–45%) | -2.2% | -4.1% … +0.1% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 20% (7%–45%) | -3.2% | -6.9% … +0.4% | +1.1% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.2% | -6.7% … +3.2% | +1.5% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.1% | -2.5% … +4.7% | +2.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-15 | 76/100 | Uptrend | -0.2% | +14.3% |
| 2020-08-03 | 75/100 | Uptrend | -14.4% | -2.2% |
| 2022-12-23 | 75/100 | Uptrend | -7.3% | -13.4% |
| 2026-02-05 | 75/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +3.6% | -0.4% |
| 2025-10-20 | 74/100 | Uptrend | -2.2% | -0.1% |
| 2024-08-02 | 74/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +4.6% | +3.9% |
| 2025-09-26 | 73/100 | Uptrend | -3.6% | -6.7% |
| 2020-11-06 | 73/100 | Uptrend | -3.2% | -3.9% |
| 2024-07-17 | 73/100 | Uptrend | +0.9% | -0.5% |
| 2021-09-07 | 73/100 | Uptrend | -9.2% | -2.8% |
| 2021-05-07 | 72/100 | Uptrend | -7.2% | +4.6% |
| 2024-08-26 | 72/100 | Uptrend | -0.5% | +4.7% |
| 2024-05-17 | 71/100 | Uptrend | -5.1% | +3.8% |
| 2024-04-26 | 71/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +5.2% | +7.2% |
| 2024-11-21 | 71/100 | Uptrend | -6.6% | +5.1% |
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 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
65
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $247.08
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 7 to 36 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
73
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
82
Risk
50
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
61
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING DGX...
Recent media coverage of Quest Diagnostics has primarily focused on its strategic expansion into advanced diagnostic testing, particularly in Alzheimer’s and wellness screening. The company has been highlighted for its partnerships and new offerings, such as expanded Alzheimer’s blood-based testing and a wellness add-on for biological age assessment, positioning itself as a leader in preventive and precision medicine. Additionally, there have been reports on insider share sales and minor adjustments to its stock price target by analysts.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Quest Diagnostics. News trend score: 92. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
46
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
87
Fundamentals
61
Technical
82
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+27%
Market Narrative
76
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+40
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **Overconfidence** (45) reflects a disconnect between price performance and fundamentals, with DGX trading far above intrinsic valuation despite weak momentum. The **Euphoria** (27) and **Herding** (27) scores imply investors may be overlooking divergence risks, possibly due to narrative-driven optimism. The **narrative gap** (20-point disparity) suggests perceptions exceed tangible reality, a classic overconfidence trigger. The key question: *Will traders remain anchored to the premium narrative, or will fundamentals reassert themselves?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 11:33 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Quest Diagnostics has expanded AD-Detect blood-based Alzheimer’s tests accessible through its U.S. collection network"
"Global clinical laboratory services market valued at USD 274.6 billion in 2025, forecast to reach USD 468.2 billion by 2036"
"Quest Diagnostics CEO sold 10,000 shares for $2.4 million"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 9D 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
Morgan Housel — 66/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for DGX reflects deep methodological disagreements about valuation, risk, and market psychology. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests the stock is near a cyclical low, aligning with his contrarian, oversold-focused approach, while Benjamin Graham’s near-zero score underscores his strict defensive criteria—failing both his margin-of-safety and earnings stability tests. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch’s low rating highlights his preference for high-growth stocks trading at reasonable prices, a threshold DGX doesn’t meet. On the other end, Charles Mackay’s moderate score hints at crowd-driven excitement, reflecting his caution about speculative bubbles, whereas Morgan Housel’s neutral stance leans into the stock’s potential as a quiet, long-term compounder. The middle-ground methodologies—like Howard Marks’ mixed verdict or Philip Fisher’s lukewarm approval—balance business fundamentals against market sentiment, revealing DGX as a stock with decent attributes but not exceptional enough for Fisher or high-risk enough for Graham’s conservative playbook.
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 66
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 60
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 50
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 50
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)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 35
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 35
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 29
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 28
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 27
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 7
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)
🔴 7
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 · 2 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.
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
33.2%
Operating Margin
14.1%
Net Margin
9.0%
EBITDA Margin
19.3%
ROE
13.8%
ROA
6.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$8.87
Cash
$420.00M
Total Debt
$5.67B
Current Ratio
1.04
Debt/Equity
0.79
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 8.7.2026 | $0.860 |
| 7.7.2026 | $0.860 |
| 6.4.2026 | $0.860 |
| 5.4.2026 | $0.860 |
| 13.1.2026 | $0.800 |
| 12.1.2026 | $0.800 |
| 3.10.2025 | $0.800 |
| 2.10.2025 | $0.800 |
| 7.7.2025 | $0.800 |
| 6.7.2025 | $0.800 |
| 7.4.2025 | $0.800 |
| 6.4.2025 | $0.800 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$247.08
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$149.94
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-39.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.0% | $1.41B | $1.30B |
| 2 | 3.6% | $1.47B | $1.23B |
| 3 | 3.3% | $1.51B | $1.17B |
| 4 | 2.9% | $1.56B | $1.10B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.60B | $1.04B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.36B
Terminal Value
$25.16B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$16.36B
Enterprise Value
$22.19B
Net Debt
$5.25B
Equity Value
$16.94B
*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
$63.45
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$30.19
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
PR Newswire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Motley Fool · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 4.9.2026
MT Newswires · 3.9.2026
Quest Diagnostics (DGX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 65/100, 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.
DGX currently scores 65/100 (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, DGX's estimated fair value is $149.94, which is 39.3% below the current price of $247.08. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DGX's technical score is 82/100, 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: Free cash flow growth: 49.5%; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $149.94 vs. price $247.08 (-39.3%); Operating margin is eroding over time; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — DGX 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 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davis J. E. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $242.72 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 60,234 | +22,677 | $112.17 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Gift | 28.8.2026 | 36,557 | -1,000 | — |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 44,224 | -16,010 | $242.88 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 37,987 | -6,237 | $243.63 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 0 | -22,677 | $112.17 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 37,557 | -430 | $244.51 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Gift | 28.8.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | — |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 430 | -430 | $244.51 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 22,677 | -22,677 | $112.17 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 6,237 | -6,237 | $243.63 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 22,677 | +22,677 | $112.17 |
| PREVOZNIK MICHAEL E | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 16,010 | -16,010 | $242.88 |
| DELANEY MARK E | Open Market Sale | 28.7.2026 | 1,600 | -1,600 | $235.18 |
| DELANEY MARK E | L | 22.7.2026 | 34 | +34 | $206.81 |
| Lassiter Wright III | L | 22.7.2026 | 6 | +6 | $206.81 |
| SAMAD SAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 102 | +102 | $206.81 |
| MAIN TIMOTHY L | L | 22.7.2026 | 21 | +21 | $206.81 |
| CARTER ROBERT B | L | 22.7.2026 | 11 | +11 | $206.80 |
| Plewman Patrick | L | 22.7.2026 | 46 | +46 | $206.81 |
| Gregg Vicky B | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 72 | +72 | $206.81 |
| KUPPUSAMY KARTHIK | L | 22.7.2026 | 37 | +37 | $206.81 |
| WENTWORTH TIMOTHY C | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 144 | +144 | — |
| WENTWORTH TIMOTHY C | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 342 | +144 | — |
| KUPPUSAMY KARTHIK | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.6.2026 | 4,827 | -4,827 | $121.81 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,445,561 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,684,192 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
68.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.6% 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