Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$29.30
▲ $0.02 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/15 04:12 PM
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$29.12 - $29.34
52-Week Range
$23.52 - $30.13
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+19.3% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 5/13 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 1.0% of price
Risk
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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.
HDV’s overall investor score of 67 reflects a mixed technical and risk profile tempered by a strong positive news sentiment. The technical category scores 56, where the stock’s position above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages suggests underlying bullish support, though conflicting signals—such as the negative MACD histogram and oversold %K—indicate weakening momentum and potential short-term volatility. Meanwhile, the risk score of 58 highlights moderate volatility (ATR: 1.0%) and a Calmar ratio of 1.19, suggesting a balanced risk-reward tradeoff despite a 10.6% historical drawdown. The news category stands out with a perfect score of 100, driven by a surge of positive articles around energy sector trends, dividend strategies, and Chevron/ExxonMobil developments, which could signal broader sector tailwinds. However, the technical and risk metrics underscore caution, as the stock’s recent momentum and valuation may face near-term headwinds despite its long-term positive positioning.
The stock sits above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, indicating sustained bullish support, but the negative MACD histogram and oversold %K (5.2) signal weakening momentum and potential short-term volatility.
This duality—strong long-term positioning with near-term caution—creates a mixed technical outlook that could influence investor sentiment and trading behavior.
All recent news articles are either neutral or positive, with a focus on energy sector rebounds, dividend income strategies, and major oil company investments, suggesting favorable external narratives.
Positive news sentiment can drive investor confidence and attract capital, potentially offsetting technical or risk-related concerns.
The ATR (1.0% of price) and Calmar ratio (1.19) indicate moderate volatility and a historically stable risk-adjusted return, though the 10.6% max drawdown remains a notable downside risk.
These metrics provide clarity on the stock’s volatility and resilience, helping assess whether its risk profile aligns with investor risk tolerance.
StockIQ conclusion
HDV presents a nuanced profile with a moderate overall score of 67, driven by a robust positive news environment but tempered by technical and risk signals that suggest caution. The stock’s position above key moving averages and healthy momentum indicators provide a foundation for long-term optimism, while the negative MACD and oversold conditions introduce short-term volatility risks. Investors should monitor whether the current positive narrative translates into sustained technical strength or if external factors could disrupt the current equilibrium.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
65
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
20d ago · $29.81
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
20d ago · $29.81
Evidence: 11 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
89
$29.81
Now
65
$29.30
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
53
Risk
58
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of the **iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV)** has primarily framed it as a potential alternative to Social Security income, highlighting its monthly dividend payouts as a key feature. Articles emphasize its 3% yield and defensive diversification but note it underperforms peers like SCHD or DGRO in total returns and dividend growth. The ETF is often grouped with others in discussions about generating steady cash flow, particularly for retirees or those seeking income before full Social Security eligibility. No company-specific developments beyond its dividend-focused positioning are reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about iShares Core High Dividend ETF. 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
41
Fundamentals
—
Technical
53
Valuation
—
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 stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+7%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for HDV suggests a **narrative-reality gap** (12-point divergence) where extreme positive sentiment (100/100) clashes with modest technical momentum (-1.8% ROC) and neutral RSI (48). **Anchoring** (score: 36) dominates, indicating traders may be fixated on the 3.2% resistance level, ignoring broader mixed signals. The lack of panic (volatility at 0.82x baseline) or herding (score: 0) suggests caution rather than blind panic or herd mentality. The key question: *Will traders break free from the resistance anchor, or will the gap between euphoric sentiment and tepid momentum widen?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:07 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"HDV ETF review: 3% yield with **monthly payouts** and defensive diversification"
"These 3 ETFs **Replace That Check** in the meantime"
"Dividend Stocks **Lost the Yield War** But May Still Beat the Market"
📈 5D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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
Morgan Housel — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 31/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast between methodologies here reveals a divide between those who favor patient, long-term holding and those who see limited clarity or risk. Morgan Housel’s near-perfect score highlights HDV as a quiet compounder—ideal for his philosophy of steady, low-key growth—but Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s moderate score suggests it’s merely favorably positioned in a cycle, not necessarily a standout pick. Meanwhile, Gerald Loeb’s cautious capital-preservation stance aligns with a more conservative view, while Charles Mackay’s lower score flags potential crowd-driven excitement, hinting at speculative risk. The majority of methodologies, however, either lack sufficient data (Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Bagehot) or see no clear edge (Livermore, Malkiel/Bogle, Schwager), leaving HDV in a gray zone where fundamentals or market timing are ambiguous. Howard Marks’ split verdict further complicates matters, as he sees a solid business but warns of overinflated expectations, while his market-cycle model flags late-cycle risks—showing how even the same investor’s frameworks can clash.
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 100
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 74
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 73
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)
🟡 62
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
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%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 36
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 31
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
Based on the last 273 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 5 bearish · 2 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.
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 19.8.2026 | $0.105 |
| 15.7.2026 | $0.087 |
| 15.6.2026 | $0.185 |
| 17.3.2026 | $0.169 |
| 16.12.2025 | $0.251 |
| 16.9.2025 | $0.190 |
| 16.6.2025 | $0.183 |
| 18.3.2025 | $0.159 |
| 17.12.2024 | $0.224 |
| 25.9.2024 | $0.246 |
| 11.6.2024 | $0.186 |
| 21.3.2024 | $0.167 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 9 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Barrons.com · 8.9.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for HDV specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
HDV's technical score is 53/100, 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: ATR: 1.0% of price; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend; ROC 12 days: -1.6%.
Yes — HDV 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 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,360,922 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,242,111 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
45.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 70.6% 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