Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$86.49
▼ $2.49 (-2.8%)
Market data updated: 09/17 04:33 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$22.89B
Day Range
$85.41 - $89.47
52-Week Range
$61.16 - $95.88
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
GPN is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+2.6% (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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.20 (3y annualized return -11.2% / max drawdown 55.1%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+4.2%
Median 40D Outcome
74/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+2.3% … +8.5%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
33%
-5.0% … -2.3%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 10 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 +2.0%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
1 occurrence(s) · 100% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
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 | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.8% | -2.6% … +4.1% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +2.2% | -1.8% … +5.4% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +2.0% | -2.1% … +7.2% | +0.6% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +4.2% | -4.3% … +8.8% | +0.6% |
| 60D | 67% (42%–85%) | +7.5% | -3.6% … +12.4% | +1.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-14 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +9.1% | +9.8% |
| 2021-01-14 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +1.6% | +10.1% |
| 2019-09-30 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +2.0% | +15.0% |
| 2018-04-02 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.5% | +1.2% |
| 2021-03-31 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +8.8% | -4.6% |
| 2023-09-26 | 76/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.0% | +6.0% |
| 2018-10-19 | 76/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.8% | -2.6% |
| 2020-08-18 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +3.3% | +11.3% |
| 2017-07-06 | 74/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +7.6% | +7.5% |
| 2020-09-11 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +10.5% | +19.8% |
| 2023-03-08 | 74/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -4.6% | -7.8% |
| 2024-12-19 | 73/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.9% | -11.9% |
| 2020-10-14 | 73/100 | Consolidation | +6.8% | +13.6% |
| 2024-02-28 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +1.3% | -20.6% |
| 2026-05-19 | 70/100 | Consolidation | -2.3% | +37.0% |
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
48
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
58
Value
50
Momentum
29
Risk
48
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
65
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING GPN...
Recent media coverage of **Global Payments (GPN)** has centered on its strong stock performance and analyst optimism. The company’s appearance at the **Genius World Conference** in August 2026 drew attention, coinciding with a **39.54% gain over 90 days** and a **5.78% rise in 30 days**, pushing its share price to **$92.54**. Analysts like RBC Capital and TD Cowen raised their price targets to **$106 and $95**, respectively, while the stock climbed **4.7% since its last earnings report**. The focus remains on its financial momentum and potential for further growth.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Global Payments. News trend score: 74. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
55
Fundamentals
65
Technical
29
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
+29%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+7
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s psychology for GPN appears fragmented, with **confirmation bias** (score: 17) and **herding** (score: 23) as the most notable but subdued forces. The narrative-reality gap (+13) suggests investors cling to optimistic expectations despite stagnant fundamentals, while the stock’s underperformance relative to peers hints at selective positioning rather than broad herd behavior. The absence of extreme states (e.g., euphoria or panic) implies a cautious, fact-checking environment—but the key question remains whether the gap will widen or narrow as fundamentals fail to materialize. Low volatility (0.96x ATR) and neutral RSI (48) further dampen emotional extremes, leaving bias-driven behavior as the dominant dynamic.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:14 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"RBC Capital analyst raises price target on Global Payments to $106 from $102"
"Global Payments has picked up momentum... 30 day share price return of 5.78% and 90 day return of 39.54%"
"Global Payments set to appear at the Genius World conference in Las Vegas"
📈 6D 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 — 91/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast between Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score (85) and the overwhelmingly negative or neutral verdicts from the other methodologies reveals a fundamental divide in how these investors evaluate this stock. Nelson’s cyclical approach sees it as oversold and positioned favorably, while the majority—including Graham’s traditional and enterprising frameworks, Fisher, Lynch, and Housel—either dismiss it outright or see it as risky, lacking clear growth, value, or long-term potential. Even the market-cycle and efficiency-based models (Marks, Malkiel/Bogle) land in the middle, suggesting neither a strong bull nor bear case, whereas Veblen and Bagehot flag deeper concerns like speculative behavior or liquidity risks. The divergence highlights whether the stock’s appeal lies in timing (Nelson) or fundamental flaws (Graham, Fisher, Lynch), with most methodologies leaning toward caution.
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 72
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
🟢 67
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 64
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 64
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 50
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 47
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 44
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 42
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 39
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 36
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 24
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 24
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
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 (2 bullish · 9 bearish · 0 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.
Medium 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
72.6%
Operating Margin
22.8%
Net Margin
18.2%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.1%
ROA
2.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$5.79
Cash
$8.34B
Total Debt
$21.55B
Current Ratio
1.69
Debt/Equity
0.95
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 11.9.2026 | $0.250 |
| 12.6.2026 | $0.250 |
| 11.6.2026 | $0.250 |
| 9.3.2026 | $0.250 |
| 8.3.2026 | $0.250 |
| 12.12.2025 | $0.250 |
| 11.12.2025 | $0.250 |
| 12.9.2025 | $0.250 |
| 11.9.2025 | $0.250 |
| 13.6.2025 | $0.250 |
| 12.6.2025 | $0.250 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.250 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$96.70
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$78.83
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 10 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
PR Newswire · 11.9.2026
Business Wire · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Trefis · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Forkast News · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Global Payments (GPN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
GPN currently scores 48/100 (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.
GPN's technical score is 29/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 1.69; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.20 (3y annualized return -11.2% / max drawdown 55.1%); Revenue growth (last year): -0.4%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -6.2%.
Yes — GPN 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cortopassi Robert M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.8.2026 | 825 | -825 | $86.12 |
| Cortopassi Robert M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.8.2026 | 87,026 | -825 | $86.12 |
| Cortopassi Robert M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.8.2026 | 2,955 | -2,955 | $88.25 |
| Cortopassi Robert M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.8.2026 | 87,851 | -2,955 | $88.25 |
| Bready Cameron M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.7.2026 | 9,703 | +9,703 | $74.66 |
| Bready Cameron M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.7.2026 | 9,703 | -9,703 | — |
| Bready Cameron M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 29.7.2026 | 8,871 | -8,871 | $88.27 |
| Bready Cameron M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.7.2026 | 441,661 | +9,703 | $74.66 |
| Bready Cameron M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 29.7.2026 | 432,790 | -8,871 | $88.27 |
| Bready Cameron M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.7.2026 | 0 | -9,703 | — |
| Steele-Belkin Dara L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 2,254 | -2,254 | $75.46 |
| Bready Cameron M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 2,297 | -2,297 | $75.46 |
| Steele-Belkin Dara L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 46,527 | -2,254 | $75.46 |
| Bready Cameron M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 431,958 | -2,297 | $75.46 |
| Deskus Archana | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| Sankaran Vivek | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| MCDANIEL CONNIE D | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| Watson Patricia A | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| JOHNSON JOIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| Kliphouse Kirsten Marie | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| PLUMMER WILLIAM B | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| Arroyo F. Thaddeus | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| BRUNO JOHN G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| Osnoss Joseph | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 3,179 | +3,179 | — |
| MCDANIEL CONNIE D | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 33,193 | +3,179 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
16,089,990 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 17,556,592 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 67.1% 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