Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$34.14
▼ $0.81 (-2.3%)
Market data updated: 09/19 01:02 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$5.74B
Day Range
$34.07 - $35.13
52-Week Range
$26.85 - $48.64
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$29.06
Resistance
$38.85
G is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-17.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/31 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
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $65.77 vs. price $34.14 (+92.7%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.05 (3y annualized return -2.6% / max drawdown 50.5%)
Risk
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
57
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
15d ago · $38.08
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
15d ago · $38.08
Evidence: 9 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
75
$37.25
Now
57
$34.14
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
64
Quality
58
Value
67
Momentum
23
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
68
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 Genpact Limited highlights its financial and operational shifts, with a focus on **dividend sustainability** and **AI-driven innovation**. The company’s dividend has been praised for strong profitability and quality, while its recent launch of an **agentic AI platform**—the Genpact Record-to-Report Suite—has reignited investor interest in its tech-driven transformation. Additionally, Genpact earned recognition as a **top workplace for parents and families**, underscoring its commitment to workplace flexibility. Analysts also note its **valuation as relatively cheap**, though past stock performance remains mixed.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Genpact Limited. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
22
Fundamentals
68
Technical
23
Valuation
67
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+21%
Market Narrative
41
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+0
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a mixed but cautiously optimistic mindset, with FOMO and euphoria competing for dominance. The +2.5% momentum and high sentiment (86/100) fuel FOMO, but the -46% DCF discount hints at detached valuation. Anchoring near resistance (4.1%) may limit aggressive buying, while the narrative gap (8) indicates potential misalignment between perception and fundamentals. The key question: will traders prioritize momentum or valuation reality?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 12:45 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Genpact launched its Genpact Record-to-Report Suite, an agentic AI platform aimed at automating finance close tasks"
"Genpact named to Newsweek's America's Greatest Workplaces for Parents & Families 2026 list"
"Genpact passes a quality dividend screen with strong profitability and a sustainable payout"
"Genpact stock looks cheap on earnings despite weak returns"
📈 13D 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
Jesse Livermore — 15/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with some models seeing clear opportunities while others flag caution or indecision. Jesse Livermore’s high score and positive verdict suggest the stock fits his trend-following criteria, while Edgar Lawrence Smith and Benjamin Graham (though mixed) both hint at long-term potential—Smith calling it a ‘buy and hold’ candidate and Graham’s traditional approach seeing *some* merit. Meanwhile, Fisher, Housel, and Marks lean toward moderate approval, acknowledging solid fundamentals but questioning whether the price already reflects those strengths or if expectations are inflated. On the other end, the more skeptical voices—like Peter Lynch, Gerald Loeb, and Samuel Nelson—warn of overvaluation, market crowding, or stretched cycles, with Nelson’s low score and overbought verdict standing out as a stark contrast to the bullish signals from Livermore and Smith. The split between technical momentum (Livermore) and fundamental or cyclical concerns (Nelson, Loeb) underscores the stock’s polarizing appeal.
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 80
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 72
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 68
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 66
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)
🟡 64
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)
🟡 61
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 59
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 53
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 52
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 48
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 47
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 35
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 15
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 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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 uptrend 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
36.0%
Operating Margin
14.8%
Net Margin
10.9%
EBITDA Margin
14.8%
ROE
21.7%
ROA
9.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.18
Cash
$853.84M
Total Debt
$1.54B
Current Ratio
1.66
Debt/Equity
0.60
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.9.2026 | $0.188 |
| 10.6.2026 | $0.188 |
| 9.6.2026 | $0.188 |
| 16.3.2026 | $0.188 |
| 15.3.2026 | $0.188 |
| 11.9.2025 | $0.170 |
| 10.9.2025 | $0.170 |
| 18.6.2025 | $0.170 |
| 17.6.2025 | $0.170 |
| 11.3.2025 | $0.170 |
| 10.3.2025 | $0.170 |
| 9.12.2024 | $0.153 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$34.14
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$65.77
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+92.7%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
5.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5.2% | $772.52M | $708.73M |
| 2 | 4.5% | $807.21M | $679.41M |
| 3 | 3.8% | $838.10M | $647.17M |
| 4 | 3.2% | $864.61M | $612.51M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $886.23M | $575.99M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$734.65M
Terminal Value
$13.98B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$9.08B
Enterprise Value
$12.31B
Net Debt
$688.47M
Equity Value
$11.62B
*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
$14.43
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.97
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 6 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
ChartMill · 5.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
Genpact Limited (G) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 57/100, 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.
G currently scores 57/100 (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, G's estimated fair value is $65.77, which is 92.7% above the current price of $34.14. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
G's technical score is 23/100, 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: $65.77 vs. price $34.14 (+92.7%); Free cash flow growth: 37.9%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.05 (3y annualized return -2.6% / max drawdown 50.5%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — G 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 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pandit Sumita | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.9.2026 | 76,713 | +76,713 | — |
| Nanduru Anil | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 6,191 | -6,191 | $37.03 |
| Dewan Sameer | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 13,318 | -13,318 | $34.10 |
| Dewan Sameer | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 1,654 | -1,654 | $34.10 |
| Weiner Michael Hal | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 176,027 | -5,900 | $34.04 |
| Weiner Michael Hal | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 5,900 | -5,900 | $34.04 |
| Nanduru Anil | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 76,444 | -11,852 | $33.92 |
| Nanduru Anil | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 11,852 | -11,852 | $33.92 |
| Nanduru Anil | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 88,296 | -17,243 | $33.96 |
| Nanduru Anil | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 17,243 | -17,243 | $33.96 |
| Madden James C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 9,999 | +9,999 | — |
| STEVENS BRIAN MARK | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Subaiya Thimaya K. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Verdi Mark A | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Morken CeCelia | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Hinshaw John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Conigliaro Laura | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Gangestad Nicholas C | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Lindstrom Carol | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 6,521 | +6,521 | — |
| Morken CeCelia | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 64,281 | +6,521 | — |
| Madden James C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 73,067 | +9,999 | — |
| Gangestad Nicholas C | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 15,334 | +6,521 | — |
| Conigliaro Laura | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 79,337 | +6,521 | — |
| Hinshaw John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 8,855 | +6,521 | — |
| Verdi Mark A | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.4.2026 | 71,526 | +6,521 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
11,431,583 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,131,235 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.2% 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