Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$10.82
▼ $0.25 (-2.3%)
Market data updated: 09/19 10:21 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$43.88B
Day Range
$10.80 - $10.99
52-Week Range
$10.30 - $30.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
13.10.2026
Support
$10.30
Resistance
$12.72
INFY is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-38.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/29 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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): 31.7% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
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
48
Quality
47
Value
55
Momentum
23
Risk
54
Sentiment
32
Fundamental
80
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Infosys Limited has primarily focused on its collaboration with **A+ Federal Credit Union**, which won two top honors in the 2026 *World’s Best Consumer Digital Bank Awards* through a partnership with Infosys. Additionally, there is brief mention of Infosys in broader market reports on Asian equities traded as American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), though these references are generic and unrelated to specific company developments. A single source highlights Infosys in an AI-related report, noting that enterprises are investing in AI for deployment rather than proven cost savings. No substantive company-specific news beyond these points is evident.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Infosys Limited. News trend score: 32. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are negative, versus 6 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
32
Fundamentals
80
Technical
23
Valuation
55
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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.
Price (3M)
+2%
Market Narrative
25
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
-12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for INFY suggests a **neutral-to-cautious stance** with no dominant psychological bias, despite a slight *Panic Selling* score. The negative 12-period momentum (-5.8%) and RSI (35) imply a lack of aggressive buying or selling, while modest volume (0.94x average) and neutral volatility (0.96x ATR) rule out extreme reactions. The narrative gap (-7) hints at a slight disconnect between market perception (30) and reality (37), but no clear behavioral pattern emerges. The key question: *Is this a pause in a broader trend or a structural shift?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:12 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"CIOs are still waiting for AI’s cost savings"
"recognized by Global Finance, in partnership with Infosys"
📈 10D 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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some seeing it as a compelling opportunity while others dismiss it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology analysis and Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle positioning—suggest the stock isn’t driven by irrational exuberance and may be undervalued relative to its market cycle, respectively. Meanwhile, Benjamin Graham’s variants and Howard Marks’ risk assessments lean positive, framing it as a statistically discounted or reasonably priced bet, though with varying degrees of defensiveness. In contrast, the lower-scoring methodologies—particularly Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, and Jesse Livermore—reject it outright, either because it lacks Fisher’s signature quality/growth traits, fails Lynch’s growth-at-a-reasonable-price test, or runs counter to Livermore’s trend-following discipline. The split highlights a tension between fundamental value hunters (Graham, Marks) and those prioritizing growth, trend alignment, or market efficiency, with even the most bullish signals (Mackay, Nelson) tempered by the skepticism of others.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 94
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 84
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 82
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 82
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 78
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 64
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 63
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 60
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 46
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 30
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 26
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 9
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
Based on the last 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid accumulation phase — a trading range after a decline with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$10.30
Range Bottom
$12.72
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
30.2%
Operating Margin
20.3%
Net Margin
16.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
31.7%
ROA
18.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.76
Cash
$2.86B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.98
Debt/Equity
0.10
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.6.2026 | $0.259 |
| 9.6.2026 | $0.259 |
| 27.10.2025 | $0.259 |
| 26.10.2025 | $0.259 |
| 30.5.2025 | $0.257 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.257 |
| 29.10.2024 | $0.250 |
| 28.10.2024 | $0.250 |
| 31.5.2024 | $0.335 |
| 30.5.2024 | $0.335 |
| 24.10.2023 | $0.216 |
| 23.10.2023 | $0.216 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$229.44
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$222.46
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 5 neutral, 9 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 12.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Reuters · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
MT Newswires · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
MT Newswires · 27.8.2026
Infosys Limited (INFY) 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.
INFY 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.
INFY's technical score is 23/100, 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: Return on equity (ROE): 31.7% — strong; Debt/equity: 0.10; Current ratio: 1.98.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.28 (3y annualized return -15.3% / max drawdown 55.2%); Net income growth: -0.2%.
Yes — INFY 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 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanghrajka Jayesh | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 5,191 | -5,191 | $1,091.36 |
| Sawhney Inderpreet | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 6,845 | -6,845 | $11.77 |
| Mathew Shaji | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 740 | -740 | $1,091.36 |
| Sawhney Inderpreet | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 368,547 | -6,845 | $11.77 |
| Mathew Shaji | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 317,561 | -740 | $1,091.36 |
| Sanghrajka Jayesh | Open Market Sale | 14.5.2026 | 180,471 | -5,191 | $1,091.36 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Open Market Sale | 8.5.2026 | 95,800 | -95,800 | $1,177.86 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Open Market Sale | 8.5.2026 | 1,572,697 | -95,800 | $1,177.86 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 230,621 | +230,621 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 13,273 | +13,273 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 13,273 | -13,273 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 230,621 | -230,621 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 13,273 | +13,273 | $5.00 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 43,138 | +43,138 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 230,621 | +230,621 | $5.00 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 230,621 | +230,621 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 13,273 | +13,273 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.5.2026 | 43,138 | +43,138 | — |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 1,655,224 | +230,621 | $5.00 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 1,668,497 | +13,273 | $5.00 |
| Parekh Salil S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.5.2026 | 0 | -13,273 | — |
| Sawhney Inderpreet | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 4,880 | +4,880 | — |
| Sanghrajka Jayesh | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 2,441 | +2,441 | — |
| Mathew Shaji | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.3.2026 | 1,830 | +1,830 | — |
| Sawhney Inderpreet | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.3.2026 | 4,880 | -4,880 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
129,796,228 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 146,472,424 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.4% 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