Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$49.52
▲ $0.07 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/17 02:07 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$26.33B
Day Range
$49.13 - $50.00
52-Week Range
$47.04 - $135.32
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
FISV is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
-62.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/30 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $133.28 vs. price $49.52 (+169.1%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.32 (3y annualized return -25.9% / max drawdown 80.2%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
+2.1%
Median 40D Outcome
63/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+3.6% … +11.1%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.7% … +0.7%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-7.2% … -4.2%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 20 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 67% (95% CI 42%–85%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +3.5%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
4 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%) | +2.1% | -3.9% … +3.8% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.5% | -1.8% … +3.1% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.5% | -0.9% … +7.9% | +1.0% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.1% | -1.4% … +5.4% | +1.8% |
| 60D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.6% | -1.7% … +8.7% | +2.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-19 | 80/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +12.2% | -16.0% |
| 2026-06-10 | 79/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -5.3% | -0.5% |
| 2021-11-30 | 79/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +8.0% | +1.6% |
| 2022-06-28 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +15.3% | +8.8% |
| 2022-02-24 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +3.3% | +0.0% |
| 2020-06-19 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +2.0% | +0.5% |
| 2020-07-14 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +0.7% | +5.0% |
| 2020-10-26 | 75/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +13.9% | +9.0% |
| 2018-12-17 | 75/100 | Downtrend | -2.5% | +15.9% |
| 2022-10-20 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +3.8% | +8.7% |
| 2020-08-20 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +6.7% | +12.2% |
| 2022-10-03 | 72/100 | Downtrend | +7.7% | +4.7% |
| 2026-05-19 | 72/100 | Downtrend | -13.0% | -2.9% |
| 2026-04-07 | 72/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +3.5% | -5.4% |
| 2026-01-28 | 70/100 | Consolidation | -4.7% | -6.3% |
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 XLF (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
49
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
56
Quality
63
Value
67
Momentum
13
Risk
48
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
65
Institutional
100
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING FISV...
Recent media coverage of Fiserv has centered on its stock performance and financial challenges amid a broader market downturn. The company’s shares have plummeted over 60% in the past year, despite being viewed as relatively undervalued by valuation metrics. Fiserv recently cut its 2026 revenue and earnings guidance due to execution delays and margin pressures, raising concerns about its transformation strategy. Additionally, there’s been focus on its partnerships, such as with Queensland Country Bank, and a new embedded banking platform by its subsidiary, Fidelity National. The Fiserv Small Business Index also highlighted continued small business sales growth despite declining foot traffic.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Fiserv. 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
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
56
Fundamentals
65
Technical
13
Valuation
67
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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 (3M)
+3%
Market Narrative
26
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
-16
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests **herding** is the dominant psychological state, as FISV’s sharper decline relative to peers (AFL, ALL, AXP) implies passive alignment rather than active conviction. The narrative gap (-23) indicates traders may be underestimating reality, possibly due to underperformance expectations. Low volatility and neutral RSI rule out panic or euphoria, while minimal FOMO signals suggest no urgency. The key question: *Is this herding a reaction to sector weakness or a mispricing signal?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 11:03 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"the broader valuation checks still flag it as potentially cheap relative to its fundamentals"
"Fiserv cut its full-year 2026 outlook, lowering both its organic revenue forecast and adjusted earnings per share guidance"
"reshapes the investment narrative around its growth, profitability, and transformation"
"Fiserv Small Business Index for August 2026, revealing a continued divide between consumer spending and consumer visits"
📈 12D 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
Charles Mackay — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for FISV reflects deep methodological disagreements about valuation, risk, and market positioning. Defensive investors like Benjamin Graham and Howard Marks see it as a reasonably priced opportunity—Graham’s defensive bar is met, while Marks flags no obvious cycle-timing red flags—but his more cyclical approach (63) pulls back, suggesting mid-cycle caution. Meanwhile, growth-oriented models like Peter Lynch (73) and Thorstein Veblen (82) highlight potential upside, aligning growth with real value, while Philip Fisher (37) dismisses it outright for lacking his signature quality and growth traits. On the other end, trend-following purists like Jesse Livermore (29) and Jack Schwager (27) reject it entirely, viewing it as a negative trend or lacking a disciplined setup, whereas liquidity-focused frameworks like Walter Bagehot (43) raise concerns about structural risk. The contrast underscores whether the stock’s fundamentals justify a defensive hold, a growth bet, or a complete pass based on risk tolerance and market timing.
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 91
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)
🟢 85
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 82
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 82
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 74
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)
🟢 73
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 58
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 52
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 49
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 47
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
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 43
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 37
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 34
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 10
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 · 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$48.37
Range Bottom
$56.63
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
—
Operating Margin
27.5%
Net Margin
16.4%
EBITDA Margin
27.5%
ROE
13.5%
ROA
4.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.36
Cash
$798.00M
Total Debt
$1.24B
Current Ratio
1.03
Debt/Equity
0.05
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$49.52
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$133.28
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+169.1%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
6.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.1% | $4.56B | $4.19B |
| 2 | 5.2% | $4.80B | $4.04B |
| 3 | 4.3% | $5.01B | $3.87B |
| 4 | 3.4% | $5.18B | $3.67B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $5.31B | $3.45B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$4.30B
Terminal Value
$83.70B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$54.40B
Enterprise Value
$73.61B
Net Debt
$441.00M
Equity Value
$73.17B
*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
$46.98
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$40.20
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 7 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
PR Newswire · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
StockStory · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Fiserv (FISV) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
FISV currently scores 49/100 (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, FISV's estimated fair value is $133.28, which is 169.1% above the current price of $49.52. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
FISV'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: Estimated fair value: $133.28 vs. price $49.52 (+169.1%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Debt/equity: 0.05.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.32 (3y annualized return -25.9% / max drawdown 80.2%); Free cash flow growth: -15.1%; Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for FISV.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 3 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FRITZ LANCE M | Open Market Purchase | 7.8.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $51.95 |
| FRITZ LANCE M | Open Market Purchase | 7.8.2026 | 27,207 | +10,000 | $51.95 |
| Rosman Adam L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 36,799 | +36,799 | — |
| Rosman Adam L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 173,523 | +36,799 | — |
| COHEN STEPHANIE | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 663 | +663 | $49.05 |
| DiSimone Harry | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 663 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Dufetel Celine S | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 663 | +663 | $49.05 |
| DE CASTRO HENRIQUE | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 663 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Yarkoni Charlotte | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 663 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Nixon Gordon M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 892 | +892 | $49.05 |
| Mamilli Wafaa | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 765 | +765 | $49.05 |
| FRITZ LANCE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 765 | +765 | $49.05 |
| Gopal Ajei | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 765 | +765 | $49.05 |
| Shedlin Gary | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 791 | +791 | $49.05 |
| Gopal Ajei | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,044 | +765 | $49.05 |
| FRITZ LANCE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,231 | +765 | $49.05 |
| DE CASTRO HENRIQUE | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 6,840 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Shedlin Gary | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,486 | +791 | $49.05 |
| Nixon Gordon M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,677 | +892 | $49.05 |
| Dufetel Celine S | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,246 | +663 | $49.05 |
| DiSimone Harry | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 8,645 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Mamilli Wafaa | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 2,640 | +765 | $49.05 |
| Yarkoni Charlotte | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,083 | +663 | $49.05 |
| COHEN STEPHANIE | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,246 | +663 | $49.05 |
| Mamilli Wafaa | Open Market Purchase | 17.6.2026 | 2,960 | +2,960 | $50.59 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
33,277,836 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 21,002,070 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
44.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 47.2% 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