Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Materials · ·
$28.73
▼ $0.76 (-2.6%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$20.71B
Day Range
$28.45 - $29.33
52-Week Range
$20.65 - $42.74
Beta
—
Next Earnings
22.10.2026
Support
$28.23
Resistance
$33.40
DOW is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
+19.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 2/24 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 1.97
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -6.1% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
82/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+1.0%
Median 40D Outcome
38/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+4.3% … +11.4%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
47%
-19.0% … -5.0%
📌 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 +1.6%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
7 occurrence(s) · 43% historical success
Echo #2 — 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 | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.5% | -1.8% … +3.4% | -0.1% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -5.9% … +6.8% | -0.1% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.6% | -7.0% … +8.6% | +0.1% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | +1.0% | -12.1% … +3.7% | +0.4% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -5.9% | -12.1% … +7.3% | -1.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-30 | 82/100 | Downtrend | -16.6% | -28.9% |
| 2022-09-13 | 79/100 | Downtrend | -8.2% | +5.9% |
| 2024-12-24 | 79/100 | Downtrend | +4.6% | -11.9% |
| 2025-02-07 | 78/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -3.1% | -25.3% |
| 2021-12-13 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +11.0% | +13.7% |
| 2020-08-03 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +12.5% | +16.2% |
| 2026-06-04 | 76/100 | Consolidation | -21.4% | -12.3% |
| 2023-03-22 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +8.4% | +3.5% |
| 2024-12-05 | 76/100 | Downtrend | -5.8% | -11.3% |
| 2026-06-18 | 75/100 | Consolidation | -4.3% | -5.9% |
| 2023-06-01 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +8.7% | +11.4% |
| 2023-05-16 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +3.4% | +8.6% |
| 2022-07-15 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +12.9% | -9.4% |
| 2021-10-29 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +1.6% | +2.2% |
| 2025-03-11 | 71/100 | Downtrend | -29.6% | -23.2% |
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 XLB (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
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
32
Quality
No data available
Value
50
Momentum
13
Risk
48
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
35
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING DOW...
Recent media coverage of Dow Inc. highlights its strong year-to-date stock performance, with shares rallying nearly 30% due to cost-cutting measures, high-return projects, and strategic growth initiatives. Analysts emphasize its consistent dividend payouts—including a recent $0.35 per share—despite a high payout ratio, sparking debate over whether the stock is undervalued or fairly priced. While short-term gains have recovered some losses, long-term investors remain cautious, with valuation models suggesting potential upside. The focus remains on cash discipline, feedstock advantages, and whether Dow’s fundamentals justify its recent rebound.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Dow Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
65
Fundamentals
35
Technical
13
Valuation
50
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.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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 (3M)
-9%
Market Narrative
57
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+19
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
DOW’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, reflecting a 13.2% drop over three months and subdued trading activity. Herding is secondary, as the stock slightly outperforms peers, indicating cautious alignment rather than aggressive movement. The narrative gap (-3) hints at a slight disconnect between market sentiment and fundamentals, but no extreme bias like panic or euphoria is evident. The key question is whether the recent relative strength (+0.9%) will sustain or if traders double down on holding losses, given the persistent downtrend.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:33 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"DOW's shares are up 29.9% YTD as cost cuts... fuel momentum."
"Dow Inc recently paid a quarterly dividend... extending a consistent post-2019 payout record despite a payout ratio above 1."
"several valuation checks point to a discount to estimated intrinsic value."
"Dow Drops as Iran Conflict Sends Oil Surging Above $90"
📈 10D 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 — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for DOW reflects deep methodological differences between value, cycle, and growth-oriented investors. At the top, Mackay’s near-perfect score suggests the stock lacks speculative frenzy, while Nelson and the Graham variants (both Defensive and Enterprising) see it as a cyclical or statistically discounted opportunity—highlighting their focus on relative valuation and timing. Meanwhile, Marks’ near-consensus with Graham underscores a shared view of reasonable risk/reward, contrasting sharply with the outright rejection from Fisher and Lynch, who demand unmistakable growth traits absent here. The bottom half, from Malkiel/Bogle’s skepticism to Livermore’s trend aversion, exposes a spectrum of skepticism: passive indexers dismiss active selection, while Livermore’s trend-following rule and Veblen’s critique of speculative growth bias further polarize the debate.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 77
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 71
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 61
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 53
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 49
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 28
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
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)
🔴 19
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)
🔴 13
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)
🔴 13
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 0
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
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.
A trading range after a decline, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of an accumulation phase.
Low confidence
$28.23
Range Bottom
$33.40
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
6.3%
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
-6.1%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-15.3%
ROA
-4.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.70
Cash
$3.82B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.97
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 31.8.2026 | $0.350 |
| 29.5.2026 | $0.350 |
| 28.5.2026 | $0.350 |
| 27.2.2026 | $0.350 |
| 26.2.2026 | $0.350 |
| 28.11.2025 | $0.350 |
| 27.11.2025 | $0.350 |
| 29.8.2025 | $0.350 |
| 28.8.2025 | $0.350 |
| 30.5.2025 | $0.700 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.700 |
| 28.2.2025 | $0.700 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$22.50
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.20
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Dow Inc. (DOW) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, rated "Weak" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
DOW currently scores 39/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
DOW'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: Current ratio: 1.97; Current ratio: 1.97.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -6.1% (negative); Calmar: -0.27 (3y annualized return -17.7% / max drawdown 65.6%); Return on equity (ROE): -15.3% (negative).
Yes — DOW 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carter Karen S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 24,150 | +24,150 | — |
| Carter Karen S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 126,640 | +126,640 | — |
| Carter Karen S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 174,481 | +24,150 | — |
| Carter Karen S | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 126,640 | +126,640 | — |
| Wyant Jill S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| ALLEN SAMUEL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| Hinman Jacqueline C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| Dial Debra L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| Banister Gaurdie E. JR. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| DAVIS RICHARD K | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| Moreno Mejia Luis Alberto | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| Yohannes Daniel | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| FETTIG JEFF M | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| DEVARD JERRI | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| BUSH WESLEY G | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 5,127 | +5,127 | — |
| DAVIS RICHARD K | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 55,299 | +5,127 | — |
| ALLEN SAMUEL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 32,522 | +5,127 | — |
| BUSH WESLEY G | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 33,800 | +5,127 | — |
| FETTIG JEFF M | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 33,157 | +5,127 | — |
| DEVARD JERRI | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 21,850 | +5,127 | — |
| Hinman Jacqueline C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 33,157 | +5,127 | — |
| Banister Gaurdie E. JR. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 27,492 | +5,127 | — |
| Wyant Jill S | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 29,777 | +5,127 | — |
| Yohannes Daniel | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 34,880 | +5,127 | — |
| Dial Debra L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.4.2026 | 24,716 | +5,127 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
37,037,072 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 35,315,622 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
45.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 56.7% 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