Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$942.00
▼ $9.47 (-1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 03:19 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$274.28B
Day Range
$939.55 - $952.99
52-Week Range
$740.01 - $1,153.99
Beta
—
Next Earnings
13.10.2026
Support
$922.00
Resistance
$1,153.99
GS is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+17.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 2/21 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$2,773.53 vs. price $942.00 (-394.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (60/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
78/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
89/100
Analog Quality
+4.3%
Median 40D Outcome
48/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+3.9% … +13.1%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.1% … +0.1%
🔴 Bearish
20%
-17.6% … -8.5%
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 +3.3%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
9 occurrence(s) · 67% 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%) | +0.5% | -1.8% … +3.3% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.3% | +0.6% … +4.2% | +0.8% |
| 20D | 67% (42%–85%) | +3.3% | +0.0% … +10.6% | +1.2% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +4.3% | -0.4% … +11.4% | +3.2% |
| 60D | 73% (48%–89%) | +7.9% | +0.1% … +21.0% | +5.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-02-27 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -19.4% | -12.5% |
| 2023-03-14 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +2.5% | +4.1% |
| 2018-05-31 | 78/100 | Downtrend | -1.1% | +4.1% |
| 2020-10-30 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +22.0% | +45.5% |
| 2026-03-05 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +3.3% | +25.5% |
| 2022-03-02 | 75/100 | Downtrend | -0.2% | -3.8% |
| 2023-08-22 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +5.6% | +5.9% |
| 2023-06-23 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +14.1% | +8.6% |
| 2022-01-20 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +0.3% | -5.2% |
| 2019-10-03 | 74/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +8.2% | +16.5% |
| 2020-09-23 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +9.0% | +31.3% |
| 2019-08-15 | 73/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +12.1% | +13.6% |
| 2022-12-19 | 72/100 | Consolidation | +1.8% | -11.9% |
| 2023-10-23 | 72/100 | Downtrend | +13.4% | +27.7% |
| 2025-03-07 | 72/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -15.9% | +7.9% |
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
44
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
1d ago · $944.25
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -24 to 6 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
60
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
50
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
51
Institutional
5
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING GS...
Recent news coverage of Goldman Sachs focused on its strategic moves in emerging tech markets: the bank released a forecast projecting 6.5 million humanoid robots by 2035, signaling its view on robotics growth, and it is reportedly competing with Bank of America to manage wealth for Anthropic employees ahead of the AI firm's IPO. These stories highlight Goldman’s involvement in AI‑related opportunities and employee wealth services.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Goldman Sachs. News trend score: 92. Reason: 12 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
58
Fundamentals
51
Technical
13
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
Price (3M)
-14%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+4
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests investors are aligning with peers, as GS’s slight underperformance relative to financial peers (-0.9% vs. -0.8%) may reflect a collective shift. Mild FOMO and euphoria (scores 14 and 19) indicate some momentum-driven enthusiasm, but overconfidence (6) hints at detached valuation from fundamentals. The narrative gap (17) implies optimism may outpace tangible reality. The key question: *Is this herding a tactical adjustment or a broader sector rotation?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 02:23 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Goldman, BofA vie to manage Anthropic employee wealth post-IPO"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 17D 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 — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 6/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for GS reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Peter Lynch’s high score and bullish stance suggest he sees untapped growth potential, while Benjamin Graham’s near-zero scores—even for his enterprising approach—highlight his strict margin-of-safety criteria, dismissing the stock as overpriced or lacking defensive traits. Meanwhile, the crowd-psychology lens of Charles Mackay and Thorstein Veblen flags speculative excitement, contrasting sharply with the disciplined caution of Jack Schwager’s quantitative wizards or Morgan Housel’s preference for volatility-resistant holdings. Even Howard Marks, who acknowledges the business’s merits, questions whether the market’s expectations are already baked in, while the efficient-market camp (Malkiel/Bogle) sees no compelling edge over passive indexing. The split underscores whether this stock is a growth bet (Lynch), a speculative bubble (Mackay/Veblen), or simply overvalued (Graham)—with no clear consensus.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 88
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 74
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 47
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 39
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 33
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 32
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
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)
🔴 30
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 18
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 6
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
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 clear downtrend 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
13.7%
ROA
0.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$51.95
Cash
$164.26B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 1.9.2026 | $5.000 |
| 1.6.2026 | $4.500 |
| 31.5.2026 | $4.500 |
| 2.3.2026 | $4.500 |
| 1.3.2026 | $4.500 |
| 2.12.2025 | $4.000 |
| 1.12.2025 | $4.000 |
| 29.8.2025 | $4.000 |
| 28.8.2025 | $4.000 |
| 30.5.2025 | $3.000 |
| 29.5.2025 | $3.000 |
| 28.2.2025 | $3.000 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$942.00
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$2,773.53
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-394.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-51.94B | $-47.65B |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-56.16B | $-47.27B |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-59.67B | $-46.08B |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-62.28B | $-44.12B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-63.84B | $-41.49B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-47.22B
Terminal Value
$-1.01T
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-654.27B
Enterprise Value
$-880.87B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-880.87B
*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
$393.49
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$372.11
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 3 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Goldman Sachs (GS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 44/100, rated "Weak" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
GS currently scores 44/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). 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, GS's estimated fair value is -$2,773.53, which is 394.4% below the current price of $942.00. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
GS'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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.6%; Net income growth: 20.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$2,773.53 vs. price $942.00 (-394.4%); Free cash flow growth: -208.6%; Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — GS 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 — 1 purchases and 20 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LESLIE ERICKA T | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 600 | -600 | $1,033.80 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Conversion of Derivative Security | 6.8.2026 | 18,181,830 | -18,181,830 | — |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Conversion of Derivative Security | 6.8.2026 | 4,445,275 | -4,445,275 | — |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Purchase | 6.8.2026 | 500,000 | +500,000 | $17.00 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Conversion of Derivative Security | 6.8.2026 | 478,498 | +478,498 | — |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Conversion of Derivative Security | 6.8.2026 | 1,957,134 | +1,957,134 | — |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 1,163 | -1,163 | $22.19 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 700 | -700 | $22.07 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 100 | -100 | $21.99 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 6,763 | -6,763 | $21.61 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 76,418 | -76,418 | $21.04 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 200 | -200 | $22.05 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 443 | -443 | $21.78 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 300 | -300 | $20.84 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 1,180 | -1,180 | $21.84 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 400 | -400 | $22.02 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 1,040 | -1,040 | $22.05 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 753 | -753 | $21.97 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 6,970 | -6,970 | $22.03 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 672 | -672 | $22.02 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 480 | -480 | $21.55 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 100 | -100 | $22.11 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 200 | -200 | $22.10 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 1,556 | -1,556 | $22.06 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 3,402 | -3,402 | $22.02 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,979,915 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,210,230 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
47.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 50.9% 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