Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$172.75
▼ $2.18 (-1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/16 09:21 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$10.07B
Day Range
$172.63 - $174.57
52-Week Range
$141.58 - $218.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
ENSG 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.
+3.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.06
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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
54
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
65
Quality
47
Value
50
Momentum
34
Risk
56
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
60
Institutional
0
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 **The Ensign Group, Inc.** has centered on its operational and financial performance, highlighting a shift toward organic growth through improved facility occupancy, clinical outcomes, and productivity—rather than relying solely on acquisitions. Analysts also discuss its stock valuation, noting a potential 13% discount based on cash flow metrics despite strong long-term returns (115.2% over five years). Corporate updates, including governance changes and an expanded $800 million credit facility, have drawn attention, alongside broader industry comparisons in healthcare providers. A separate study briefly ties private equity-owned childcare to regulatory gaps, though unrelated to Ensign’s direct operations.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about The Ensign Group, Inc.. 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
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
35
Fundamentals
60
Technical
34
Valuation
50
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
60
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+23
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixating on the 2.3% proximity to support, possibly treating it as a psychological barrier. The narrative-reality gap (14 points) hints at a disconnect where optimism (51) exceeds observable fundamentals (37), reinforcing reliance on this anchor. Herding is mild, implying cautious alignment rather than aggressive movement. The key question: will traders break the anchor if support holds, or will the gap widen as sentiment remains detached from price action?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 03:29 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"ENSG's decentralized model is driving organic growth through higher occupancy, stronger clinical results and improved productivity across its facilities."
"The 115.2% return over the past 5 years... 3-year total shareholder return of 82.21%."
"Ensign Group's rising occupancy, acquisitions and real-estate growth support its outlook."
"reimbursement and cost pressures remain risks."
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith — 82/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s documented principles, the model estimates a very favorable cycle position, which aligns with Edgar Lawrence Smith, Morgan Housel, and Charles Mackay who all see the stock as a strong long‑term hold or a quiet compounder. In the middle range, Gerald Loeb, Howard Marks, Jack Schwager and Walter Bagehot convey more moderate or mixed views, reflecting concerns about risk, valuation expectations, or only adequate liquidity. The lowest scores from Thorstein Veblen, the efficient‑market duo, Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, and both of Benjamin Graham’s frameworks indicate that, according to their criteria, the stock lacks clear growth‑to‑profit translation, quality signals, or sufficient margin of safety, leading to a generally negative outlook. Jesse Livermore’s very low score reinforces the trend‑negative verdict, completing the spectrum of opinions across the historical methodologies.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 82
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 78
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
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 73
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 64
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 59
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 58
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)
🟡 43
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 39
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)
🟡 37
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 37
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 26
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 19
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
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
Based on the last 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 bearish · 2 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$163.07
Range Bottom
$186.00
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
20.5%
Operating Margin
8.4%
Net Margin
6.8%
EBITDA Margin
10.5%
ROE
15.4%
ROA
6.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.00
Cash
$503.88M
Total Debt
$141.76M
Current Ratio
1.42
Debt/Equity
0.06
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.065 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.065 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.065 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.065 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.065 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.065 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.063 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.063 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.063 |
| 29.6.2025 | $0.063 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.063 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.063 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$37.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$36.13
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockStory · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
Zacks · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
ChartMill · 25.8.2026
Zacks · 21.8.2026
Yahoo · 21.8.2026
MT Newswires · 20.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 20.8.2026
The Ensign Group, Inc. (ENSG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
ENSG currently scores 54/100 (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.
ENSG's technical score is 34/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.06; +14.4% over the last 3 months relative to the index; Revenue growth (last year): 18.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — ENSG 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 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burton Spencer | Gift | 11.8.2026 | 2,500 | -2,500 | — |
| Burton Spencer | Gift | 11.8.2026 | 65,970 | -2,500 | — |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 175 | -175 | $181.88 |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 200 | -200 | $185.00 |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 23,677 | -200 | $185.00 |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 23,877 | -175 | $181.88 |
| Agwunobi John O | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 392 | -392 | $171.06 |
| Agwunobi John O | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 9,503 | -392 | $171.06 |
| Parkinson Mark Vincent | Open Market Sale | 16.7.2026 | 100 | -100 | $168.12 |
| Parkinson Mark Vincent | Open Market Sale | 16.7.2026 | 3,900 | -100 | $168.12 |
| Parkinson Mark Vincent | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| Abbott Swati Bargotra | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| SMITH BARRY M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| Shaw Daren | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| Agwunobi John O | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 600 | +600 | — |
| SMITH BARRY M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 21,952 | +600 | — |
| Shaw Daren | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 24,926 | +600 | — |
| Agwunobi John O | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 9,895 | +600 | — |
| Abbott Swati Bargotra | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 20,832 | +600 | — |
| Blouin Ann Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 24,052 | +600 | — |
| Parkinson Mark Vincent | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 4,000 | +600 | — |
| SMITH BARRY M | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 700 | -700 | $164.28 |
| SMITH BARRY M | Open Market Sale | 2.6.2026 | 21,352 | -700 | $164.28 |
| Wittekind Beverly B. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.5.2026 | 102 | -102 | $171.97 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,474,932 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,682,685 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 45.2% 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