Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$154.85
▼ $1.36 (-0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/19 06:21 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$10.86B
Day Range
$153.98 - $156.87
52-Week Range
$121.04 - $193.39
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$143.34
Resistance
$174.99
JKHY is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
-2.2% (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
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: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.2% / max drawdown 35.9%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
73/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
87/100
Analog Quality
-0.1%
Median 40D Outcome
71/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
40%
+3.6% … +6.2%
🟡 Base
33%
-0.2% … +0.6%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-6.8% … -1.2%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 40% (95% CI 20%–64%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.6%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
8 occurrence(s) · 50% historical success
Echo #2 — Oversold Reversal
3 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%) | +1.0% | -0.9% … +2.1% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.4% | -1.5% … +2.1% | +0.3% |
| 20D | 40% (20%–64%) | +0.6% | -0.9% … +4.0% | +0.8% |
| 40D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.1% | -7.8% … +5.6% | +0.9% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -7.1% … +8.0% | +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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-12-19 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +0.8% | -16.5% |
| 2019-05-13 | 72/100 | Downtrend | +2.9% | +3.1% |
| 2026-04-01 | 72/100 | Downtrend | -1.2% | -12.1% |
| 2019-02-21 | 70/100 | Consolidation | +4.7% | +3.1% |
| 2023-08-23 | 69/100 | Downtrend | -5.1% | -2.0% |
| 2026-02-06 | 69/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -1.0% | -13.9% |
| 2021-05-07 | 68/100 | Consolidation | +0.0% | +12.6% |
| 2022-01-25 | 68/100 | Consolidation | +5.7% | +28.2% |
| 2022-05-04 | 68/100 | Consolidation | -0.2% | +10.4% |
| 2020-09-21 | 68/100 | Downtrend | -0.7% | -0.4% |
| 2025-04-10 | 68/100 | Downtrend | +6.4% | +5.7% |
| 2023-02-15 | 67/100 | Downtrend | -12.1% | -7.5% |
| 2022-06-22 | 67/100 | Consolidation | +14.9% | +10.8% |
| 2022-11-14 | 67/100 | Downtrend | +3.2% | -4.0% |
| 2025-08-08 | 66/100 | Downtrend | +0.6% | -6.8% |
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
59
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 29, 2026
Then
72
$169.73
Now
59
$154.85
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
67
Quality
63
Value
50
Momentum
26
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
79
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING JKHY...
Recent media coverage of Jack Henry & Associates has centered on its strategic partnerships, financial strength, and a cybersecurity incident. The company announced partnerships with Celtic Bank for technology support and Trust Stamp for identity verification integration. Investor-focused articles highlighted its strong dividend growth and profitability. Additionally, Jack Henry disclosed a minor cybersecurity breach in non-production systems, reassuring stakeholders that no client-facing systems were affected. CEO Greg Adelson’s upcoming conference presentation was also noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Jack Henry & Associates. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 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)
42
Psychology
43
Fundamentals
79
Technical
26
Valuation
50
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+24%
Market Narrative
49
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+7
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
JKHY’s psychology score (27) reflects a dominant *herding* dynamic, where the stock’s sharper decline (-3.0%) relative to peers (-0.8%) suggests passive alignment with broader sector weakness. The narrative-reality gap (-10) hints at a disconnect between market perception and fundamentals, but no extreme bias (e.g., panic or euphoria) is evident. Key open question: Is the herding behavior a function of sector rotation or a technical pullback? The absence of volatility spikes or extreme sentiment extremes implies caution rather than panic, but the underperformance may attract further relative selling if peers stabilize.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:32 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"No client-facing systems or core platforms accessed or disrupted; incident determined not financially material"
"1.35% yield, 6.38% dividend growth, low debt, strong profitability"
📈 9D 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 — 88/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 11/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing it as a compelling long-term hold while others dismiss it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—like Charles Mackay’s caution against crowd mania, Edgar Smith’s 'buy-and-hold for a decade' thesis, and Thorstein Veblen’s alignment of growth with real value—suggest it fits a patient, fundamentalist investor’s criteria, emphasizing stability and intrinsic worth. Meanwhile, the more conservative or cyclical frameworks, such as Benjamin Graham’s strict defensive criteria or Jack Schwager’s disciplined trend-following, reject it entirely, flagging either valuation gaps or lack of clear momentum. Even moderate-risk models like Gerald Loeb or Walter Bagehot temper enthusiasm, questioning liquidity or risk exposure, while efficient-market theorists and Peter Lynch’s growth-at-a-reasonable-price standard outright dismiss it as unexceptional or overpriced. The split reflects a tension between growth potential and risk tolerance, with some methodologies prioritizing qualitative durability and others demanding quantifiable edge.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 78
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 77
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 69
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 66
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 60
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 49
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 48
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 43
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 39
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 33
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 17
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 11
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 (1 bullish · 8 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.
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
43.7%
Operating Margin
25.0%
Net Margin
19.8%
EBITDA Margin
25.0%
ROE
24.5%
ROA
16.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.00
Cash
$12.06M
Total Debt
$40.00M
Current Ratio
1.17
Debt/Equity
0.02
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 4.9.2026 | $0.610 |
| 1.6.2026 | $0.610 |
| 31.5.2026 | $0.610 |
| 5.3.2026 | $0.610 |
| 4.3.2026 | $0.610 |
| 2.12.2025 | $0.580 |
| 1.12.2025 | $0.580 |
| 5.9.2025 | $0.580 |
| 4.9.2025 | $0.580 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.580 |
| 28.5.2025 | $0.580 |
| 6.3.2025 | $0.580 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$154.85
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$167.97
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+8.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.0% | $743.41M | $682.03M |
| 2 | 5.9% | $787.01M | $662.41M |
| 3 | 4.7% | $824.34M | $636.55M |
| 4 | 3.6% | $854.20M | $605.14M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $875.56M | $569.05M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$694.86M
Terminal Value
$13.81B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$8.97B
Enterprise Value
$12.13B
Net Debt
$27.94M
Equity Value
$12.10B
*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
$28.48
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$16.99
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 7 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.9.2026
MT Newswires · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Motley Fool · 9.9.2026
Jack Henry & Associates (JKHY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 59/100, 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.
JKHY currently scores 59/100 (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, JKHY's estimated fair value is $167.97, which is 8.5% above the current price of $154.85. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
JKHY's technical score is 26/100, 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; Return on equity (ROE): 24.5% — strong; Debt/equity: 0.02.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.2% / max drawdown 35.9%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — JKHY 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preece Richard | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 270 | +270 | — |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 9,675 | -498 | $172.39 |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 28,670 | -495 | $172.39 |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 30,128 | -1,162 | $172.39 |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 29,141 | +2,456 | — |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 10,636 | -532 | $172.39 |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 10,188 | +513 | — |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 29,165 | +1,114 | — |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 10,173 | +1,130 | — |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 31,290 | +2,620 | — |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 11,168 | +1,206 | — |
| Adelson Gregory R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 28,051 | -1,090 | $172.39 |
| Morgan Craig Keith | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 9,962 | -226 | $172.39 |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 13,859 | +355 | — |
| Carsley Mimi | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 5,113 | +5,113 | — |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 13,702 | -157 | $172.39 |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 13,863 | +161 | — |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 13,792 | -71 | $172.39 |
| McLachlan Shanon G. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 2,861 | +83 | — |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 14,170 | +378 | — |
| McLachlan Shanon G. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 2,830 | -31 | $172.39 |
| Swearingen Renee Ann | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 14,003 | -167 | $172.39 |
| McLachlan Shanon G. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.8.2026 | 3,068 | -73 | $172.39 |
| McLachlan Shanon G. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 3,013 | +183 | — |
| McLachlan Shanon G. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 462 | +462 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,321,765 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,532,422 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
65.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.9% 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