Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$173.42
▲ $1.16 (+0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 04:05 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$13.33B
Day Range
$170.20 - $173.45
52-Week Range
$127.85 - $191.55
Beta
—
Next Earnings
20.10.2026
Support
$167.66
Resistance
$191.55
GL is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+20.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/26 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $221.75 vs. price $173.42 (+27.9%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.26 (3y annualized return 16.0% / max drawdown 61.7%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
90/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+2.8%
Median 40D Outcome
69/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+3.1% … +7.7%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.2% … +0.2%
🔴 Bearish
33%
-3.1% … -1.1%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 40 trading days.
📌 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 +1.3%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
5 occurrence(s) · 20% historical success
Echo #2 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 0% 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 | 33% (15%–58%) | -0.1% | -1.1% … +2.0% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 33% (15%–58%) | -1.4% | -2.0% … +1.9% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.3% | -1.0% … +6.9% | +1.3% |
| 40D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.8% | +0.4% … +9.3% | +2.7% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +7.0% | +1.7% … +12.6% | +4.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-04-05 | 90/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.0% | -4.2% |
| 2018-03-08 | 86/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -3.1% | -0.5% |
| 2018-11-01 | 86/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +1.3% | -1.9% |
| 2026-03-31 | 86/100 | Consolidation | +9.6% | +28.8% |
| 2018-06-11 | 85/100 | Consolidation | -1.1% | +4.0% |
| 2018-11-21 | 85/100 | Consolidation | -15.8% | -3.4% |
| 2023-05-09 | 84/100 | Consolidation | -0.5% | +4.5% |
| 2025-12-09 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +7.0% | +6.7% |
| 2025-06-25 | 83/100 | Consolidation | +8.3% | +19.8% |
| 2023-09-20 | 82/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.5% | +10.6% |
| 2025-11-24 | 82/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +6.8% | +7.0% |
| 2023-10-25 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +7.4% | +9.2% |
| 2025-05-30 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +2.0% | +14.6% |
| 2025-05-08 | 81/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.4% | +15.1% |
| 2025-11-05 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -2.2% | +7.4% |
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
60
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
53
Quality
63
Value
67
Momentum
47
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
60
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING GL...
Recent media coverage of Globe Life highlights its strong financial performance and market outperformance. The company’s stock has surged by 20.2% over six months, exceeding the S&P 500, driven by robust health insurance growth, premium increases, and expanded distribution. Analysts note its solid fundamentals, though risks like medical inflation and valuation concerns persist. Comparisons to its preferred stock (GL.PR.D) and broader industry trends also feature prominently.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Globe Life. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 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)
42
Psychology
34
Fundamentals
60
Technical
47
Valuation
67
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.
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)
+2%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+10
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior at 71 suggests traders are fixating on the 1.5% support level, likely due to its proximity. Herding at 54 hints at relative underperformance, but the narrative gap (10 points) implies a disconnect between market perception and fundamentals. Euphoria and overconfidence are absent despite positive momentum, as valuation remains detached from fair value. The key question: will traders break the 1.5% anchor, or will they hold near support despite the valuation gap?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:04 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"GL's health business gains momentum from strong premium growth, rate increases and expanding distribution"
"Globe Life’s 20.2% return over the past six months has outpaced the S&P 500 by 9.3%"
"higher health claims remain a risk"
📈 15D 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
Thorstein Veblen — 70/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 25/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The scores for GL range from a high of 82 to a low of 25, illustrating how each historical methodology emphasizes different aspects of the company. Approaches that stress balance‑sheet depth and crowd sentiment, such as Bagehot’s and Mackay’s, assign relatively high marks but qualify them with notes about insufficient data or lack of mania, indicating cautious optimism. Value‑focused frameworks like Graham’s and Fisher’s give lower scores, reflecting concerns that the stock is not cheap enough or does not meet the quality‑growth signature they require. Mid‑range scores from Lynch, Marks, Loeb and others describe a mixed or moderate view, acknowledging a solid business but suggesting that price, expectations, or risk may already be baked in. Based on each investor’s documented principles, the model estimates interpretations that vary from a potential long‑term hold to a neutral stance, with no clear consensus for an outright purchase.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 82
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 70
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 68
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 68
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 67
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 61
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 52
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 51
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 49
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 48
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 40
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 25
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (3 bullish · 4 bearish · 3 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 downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
19.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
19.4%
ROA
3.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$14.27
Cash
$144.70M
Total Debt
$2.63B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.44
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 6.7.2026 | $0.330 |
| 5.7.2026 | $0.330 |
| 2.4.2026 | $0.330 |
| 1.4.2026 | $0.330 |
| 5.1.2026 | $0.270 |
| 4.1.2026 | $0.270 |
| 3.10.2025 | $0.270 |
| 2.10.2025 | $0.270 |
| 3.7.2025 | $0.270 |
| 2.7.2025 | $0.270 |
| 3.4.2025 | $0.270 |
| 2.4.2025 | $0.270 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$173.42
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$221.75
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+27.9%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.7% | $1.31B | $1.20B |
| 2 | 4.1% | $1.37B | $1.15B |
| 3 | 3.6% | $1.42B | $1.09B |
| 4 | 3.0% | $1.46B | $1.03B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.50B | $971.95M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.25B
Terminal Value
$23.58B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$15.33B
Enterprise Value
$20.78B
Net Debt
$2.48B
Equity Value
$18.30B
*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
$72.40
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$66.45
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 9 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
StockStory · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
NYSE · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
NYSE · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
TipRanks · 26.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
StockStory · 24.8.2026
Zacks · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 21.8.2026
Zacks · 21.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
Globe Life (GL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 60/100, 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.
GL currently scores 60/100 (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, GL's estimated fair value is $221.75, which is 27.9% above the current price of $173.42. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
GL's technical score is 47/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: $221.75 vs. price $173.42 (+27.9%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Debt/equity: 0.44.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.26 (3y annualized return 16.0% / max drawdown 61.7%); Free cash flow growth: -5.8%; Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — GL 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 14 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 23,000 | -23,000 | — |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 1,017 | -1,017 | $184.75 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 10,529 | -10,529 | $183.83 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 11,454 | -11,454 | $182.77 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 23,000 | +23,000 | $103.23 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 30,981 | +23,000 | $103.23 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 19,527 | -11,454 | $182.77 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 7,981 | -1,017 | $184.75 |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 0 | -23,000 | — |
| MITCHELL ROBERT BRIAN | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 8,998 | -10,529 | $183.83 |
| Darden James Matthew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.7.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | — |
| Darden James Matthew | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 400 | -400 | $183.36 |
| Darden James Matthew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.7.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $98.32 |
| Darden James Matthew | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 49,600 | -49,600 | $182.43 |
| Darden James Matthew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.7.2026 | 108,451 | +50,000 | $98.32 |
| Darden James Matthew | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 58,851 | -49,600 | $182.43 |
| Darden James Matthew | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 58,451 | -400 | $183.36 |
| Darden James Matthew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.7.2026 | 0 | -50,000 | — |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.7.2026 | 11,000 | -11,000 | — |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 10,720 | -10,720 | $179.30 |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.7.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | — |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 2,790 | -2,790 | $181.81 |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 2,650 | -2,650 | $181.23 |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 4,840 | -4,840 | $180.08 |
| Kalmbach Thomas Peter | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.7.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $103.23 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,064,214 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,635,636 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 56.4% 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