Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$511.65
▲ $5.17 (+1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/21 01:43 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/21/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
$40.31B
Day Range
$505.21 - $516.43
52-Week Range
$500.61 - $769.98
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$500.61
Resistance
$624.15
IDXX is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
-21.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/31 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 22.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $232.36 vs. price $511.65 (-54.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (76/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
79/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
+2.2%
Median 40D Outcome
67/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+1.9% … +4.7%
🟡 Base
27%
-0.1% … +0.5%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-12.3% … -5.4%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.7%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
5 occurrence(s) · 40% historical success
Echo #2 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 100% 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 | 20% (7%–45%) | -1.1% | -2.7% … +0.5% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -1.9% | -3.8% … +2.6% | +0.6% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.7% | -1.3% … +2.5% | +0.9% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.2% | -3.5% … +7.8% | +2.1% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -1.7% | -5.8% … +4.4% | +3.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-19 | 79/100 | Downtrend | -0.1% | +0.8% |
| 2026-04-02 | 79/100 | Downtrend | -0.4% | -7.6% |
| 2017-08-15 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +2.8% | -3.0% |
| 2025-01-02 | 76/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +14.7% | +2.4% |
| 2024-10-30 | 75/100 | Downtrend | -6.5% | -7.2% |
| 2026-04-30 | 75/100 | Downtrend | +0.5% | +1.6% |
| 2025-03-25 | 74/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +2.1% | +25.4% |
| 2024-11-13 | 74/100 | Downtrend | +1.7% | +6.4% |
| 2026-06-23 | 73/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +0.7% | -6.4% |
| 2024-04-23 | 73/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +5.0% | -5.2% |
| 2023-10-12 | 73/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -2.2% | +29.1% |
| 2026-03-19 | 72/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +1.6% | -1.7% |
| 2024-07-25 | 72/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +4.5% | -2.7% |
| 2026-02-11 | 72/100 | Consolidation | -11.9% | -13.7% |
| 2025-03-10 | 71/100 | Consolidation | -13.2% | +20.2% |
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 XLV (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
52
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
76
Quality
63
Value
33
Momentum
13
Risk
48
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
79
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING IDXX...
Recent media coverage of Idexx Laboratories (IDXX) has centered on its stock performance and investor sentiment, with a notable 7.8% decline since its last earnings report raising questions about potential rebounds. The company’s recurring revenue growth from diagnostics and cloud software, alongside improved earnings per share (EPS) outlook for 2026, has been highlighted as positive, alongside international expansion and margin improvements. However, risks like foreign exchange exposure and distributor inventory fluctuations persist. Investor activity, including insider stock exercises and institutional holdings, has also been noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Idexx Laboratories. News trend score: 80. Reason: 10 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
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
57
Fundamentals
79
Technical
13
Valuation
33
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 (3M)
-9%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+19
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring bias (score 90) reflects a market fixated on the 0.5% support level, despite weak momentum and peer underperformance. Overconfidence (45) and euphoria (33) persist due to the extreme DCF premium (+124%), hinting at detached valuation expectations. The narrative gap (24) widens reality (42) from optimism (66), raising skepticism about sustainability. The key question: will traders hold near support or break away from the anchoring point?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:37 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"IDEXX raises its 2026 EPS outlook as recurring diagnostics growth, wider margins and international expansion offset softer U.S. veterinary traffic."
"IDXX's CAG diagnostics and cloud software growth support recurring revenues"
"Fundsmith's 13F portfolio expanded holdings to include IDEXX, achieving strong Q2 gains despite trailing broader indices."
"IDEXX pairs resilient diagnostics growth... with a premium valuation that supports a hold-or-wait stance."
📈 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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for IDXX reflects deep contrasts in methodology priorities. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score highlights his technical bias, favoring the stock’s oversold cycle position, while Thorstein Veblen and Philip Fisher’s high scores emphasize its real-value growth and exceptional quality—both qualitative, forward-looking lenses. Meanwhile, the middle-tier scores from Morgan Housel and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) suggest a cautious but constructive view, balancing growth potential with moderate risk. At the lower end, Benjamin Graham’s and Jesse Livermore’s harsh verdicts stem from strict valuation and trend-based rules, dismissing the stock as overpriced or out of alignment with momentum. Even the efficient-market camp sees little edge, while Charles Mackay’s crowd-excitement warning hints at speculative bubbles—showing how subjective signals clash with quantitative or trend-driven frameworks.
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 79
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 75
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 70
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)
🟢 70
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 63
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 61
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 53
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)
🟡 53
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)
🟡 48
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)
🟡 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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 42
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 17
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 13
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?
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.
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
61.8%
Operating Margin
31.6%
Net Margin
24.6%
EBITDA Margin
35.0%
ROE
66.0%
ROA
31.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$13.17
Cash
$180.07M
Total Debt
$449.84M
Current Ratio
1.23
Debt/Equity
0.28
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$511.65
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$232.36
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-54.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
8.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.5% | $1.15B | $1.05B |
| 2 | 7.0% | $1.23B | $1.03B |
| 3 | 5.5% | $1.30B | $1.00B |
| 4 | 4.0% | $1.35B | $954.71M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.38B | $897.78M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.06B
Terminal Value
$21.78B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$14.16B
Enterprise Value
$19.10B
Net Debt
$269.77M
Equity Value
$18.83B
*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
$19.81
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$13.35
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 5 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Trefis · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Motley Fool · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Barchart · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 3.9.2026
Idexx Laboratories (IDXX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
IDXX currently scores 52/100 (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, IDXX's estimated fair value is $232.36, which is 54.6% below the current price of $511.65. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
IDXX'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: 22.6%; Free cash flow growth: 30.8%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $232.36 vs. price $511.65 (-54.6%); Calmar: 0.10 (3y annualized return 3.8% / max drawdown 37.4%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for IDXX.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kingsley Lawrence D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 2,203 | +2,203 | $114.17 |
| Kingsley Lawrence D | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 2,203 | -2,203 | $532.08 |
| Kingsley Lawrence D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 2,203 | -2,203 | — |
| Emerson Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 86 | -86 | — |
| Emerson Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 265 | -265 | — |
| Emerson Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 265 | +265 | $178.26 |
| Emerson Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 4,421 | -86 | — |
| Emerson Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 4,507 | +265 | $178.26 |
| Emerson Andrew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.8.2026 | 925 | -265 | — |
| HOOLEY JOSEPH L | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 49 | +49 | $558.80 |
| HOOLEY JOSEPH L | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 325 | +49 | $558.80 |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 639 | -639 | — |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 284 | -284 | $566.79 |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 639 | +639 | — |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 10,717 | +639 | — |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 10,433 | -284 | $566.79 |
| FENNELL GEORGE | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 0 | -639 | — |
| Britt Irene Chang | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 234 | +234 | — |
| Britt Irene Chang | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 525 | +525 | — |
| Claflin Bruce L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 234 | +234 | — |
| Claflin Bruce L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 525 | +525 | — |
| ESSIG STUART | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 234 | +234 | — |
| ESSIG STUART | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 525 | +525 | — |
| HOOLEY JOSEPH L | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 234 | +234 | — |
| HOOLEY JOSEPH L | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 525 | +525 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,092,080 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,926,454 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
29.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 31.3% 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