Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Telecommunications · ·
$6.40
▼ $0.08 (-1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 11:21 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$6.60B
Day Range
$6.33 - $6.57
52-Week Range
$5.52 - $11.95
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$5.65
Resistance
$7.27
+11.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/26 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): 155.7% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -6.5% (negative)
Fundamental
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
44
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
32
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
27
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
42
Institutional
100
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 on **Lumen Technologies (LUMN)** has primarily focused on its stock performance and investor speculation following its recent earnings report. The company’s shares have risen **12% since the last earnings announcement**, prompting analysis of future stock movement and whether the upward trend will continue. While broader discussions often mention Lumen alongside Verizon (VZ) and AT&T, the headlines do not provide detailed operational or financial updates beyond this stock-related commentary.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Lumen Technologies, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 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
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
71
Fundamentals
42
Technical
27
Valuation
50
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.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-22%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+30
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests dominant overconfidence, where price momentum far outpaces fundamental deterioration—a classic disconnect. Confirmation bias and FOMO amplify this, as traders prioritize narrative over deteriorating fundamentals. The key open question is whether the narrative gap will persist or if reality will force a re-evaluation. Elevated volume and sentiment may mask fragility, but the 3-month decline hints at unresolved loss aversion. The stock’s underperformance relative to peers further questions the sustainability of current euphoria.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 06:41 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Lumen (LUMN) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues."
"heavy investment, competition and debt remain key challenges."
"AT&T Stock's margin hit a multi-year best as its copper network winds down."
"subscale operations make it harder to expand their competitive moats."
📈 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
Charles Mackay — 76/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divergent verdicts reflect deep philosophical divides among the methodologies. The highest-scoring approaches—like Mackay’s crowd psychology and the Enterprising Graham model—suggest either speculative excitement or a lack of concrete valuation data, implying either a speculative bubble or an overlooked opportunity. In contrast, Fisher, Lynch, and Housel’s near-zero scores reject it outright, dismissing it as lacking growth, value, or patience-friendly stability. Meanwhile, mid-tier signals from Marks and Malkiel hint at a decent business but question whether it’s priced fairly or aligned with broader market conditions, while Livermore and Loeb’s warnings flag it as a high-risk trade. The contrast underscores whether the stock is a speculative play, a flawed long-term hold, or simply too volatile for disciplined investors.
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
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)
🟢 74
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 67
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)
🟡 53
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: 15%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 45
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 45
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 45
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
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 37
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 33
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
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 9
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)
🔴 8
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 6 bearish · 3 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.
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.
Gross Margin
46.5%
Operating Margin
-6.5%
Net Margin
-14.0%
EBITDA Margin
15.6%
ROE
155.7%
ROA
-5.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.75
Cash
$1.00B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.80
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 29.8.2022 | $0.250 |
| 28.8.2022 | $0.250 |
| 27.5.2022 | $0.250 |
| 26.5.2022 | $0.250 |
| 7.3.2022 | $0.250 |
| 6.3.2022 | $0.250 |
| 26.11.2021 | $0.250 |
| 25.11.2021 | $0.250 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
-$1.12
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$5.61
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 6 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
MarketBeat · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
MarketBeat · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
MarketBeat · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Trefis · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
MarketBeat · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Trefis · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 44/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
LUMN currently scores 44/100 (Weak) 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.
LUMN's technical score is 27/100, 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): 155.7% — strong; Current ratio: 1.80; Gross margin: 46.5% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -6.5% (negative); Net margin: -14.0% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
Yes — LUMN 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 — 2 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnson Kathleen E | Open Market Purchase | 6.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $6.13 |
| Johnson Kathleen E | Open Market Purchase | 6.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $6.13 |
| Hinshaw John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 27,350 | +27,350 | $6.08 |
| Hinshaw John M | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 27,350 | +27,350 | $6.08 |
| MCMILLAN STEPHEN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Collins Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Capossela Christopher C | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Bejar Martha Helena | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| GOLDBERG MICHELLE J | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Allen Quincy L | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Linear Diankha | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Chilton Kevin P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Bejar Martha Helena | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 421,144 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Allen Quincy L | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 352,764 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Chilton Kevin P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 436,716 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Collins Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 25,197 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Capossela Christopher C | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 92,199 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| GOLDBERG MICHELLE J | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 76,591 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| MCMILLAN STEPHEN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 76,591 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Linear Diankha | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 223,426 | +25,197 | $9.44 |
| Fowler James | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.5.2026 | 22,922 | -22,922 | $10.34 |
| Fowler James | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.5.2026 | 1,608,275 | -22,922 | $10.34 |
| Johnson Kathleen E | Gift | 7.5.2026 | 241,450 | -241,450 | — |
| Johnson Kathleen E | Gift | 7.5.2026 | 241,450 | +241,450 | — |
| Johnson Kathleen E | Gift | 7.5.2026 | 8,509,539 | -241,450 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
69,801,663 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 62,423,626 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 66.2% 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