Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$540.61
▼ $3.99 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/17 11:11 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$39.30B
Day Range
$537.36 - $548.65
52-Week Range
$501.08 - $644.77
Beta
—
Next Earnings
20.10.2026
MSCI is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
-4.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/32 factors positiveRisk: High
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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $317.24 vs. price $540.61 (-41.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (61/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
83/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+3.6%
Median 40D Outcome
64/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+6.4% … +9.8%
🟡 Base
20%
+0.1% … +0.8%
🔴 Bearish
27%
-6.4% … -4.5%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.8%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
4 occurrence(s) · 50% 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 | 67% (42%–85%) | +1.7% | -0.1% … +4.7% | +0.6% |
| 10D | 80% (55%–93%) | +4.5% | +1.7% … +8.2% | +1.0% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +5.8% | -1.9% … +8.1% | +1.7% |
| 40D | 73% (48%–89%) | +3.6% | -0.4% … +9.2% | +3.4% |
| 60D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.1% | -2.6% … +11.4% | +6.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-20 | 83/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +6.5% | +11.6% |
| 2025-10-17 | 82/100 | Downtrend | +5.8% | +11.3% |
| 2024-04-12 | 82/100 | Consolidation | -7.9% | -7.1% |
| 2020-10-28 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +18.6% | +18.8% |
| 2023-10-02 | 81/100 | Consolidation | -4.9% | +11.6% |
| 2026-03-25 | 81/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +12.6% | +9.4% |
| 2025-12-09 | 79/100 | Downtrend | +8.2% | +5.1% |
| 2025-01-13 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -0.6% | -5.4% |
| 2025-03-12 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +0.8% | +4.3% |
| 2026-05-15 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +8.8% | +0.2% |
| 2025-02-07 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -5.9% | -5.9% |
| 2023-06-23 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +8.1% | +15.7% |
| 2026-06-22 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -3.3% | -6.9% |
| 2025-06-18 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +6.3% | +6.0% |
| 2025-09-05 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +0.9% | +0.8% |
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
47
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
61
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
24
Risk
28
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
66
Institutional
86
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING MSCI...
Recent media coverage of MSCI Inc. has centered on two key themes: its financial performance and index-related controversies. Analysts highlight MSCI’s strong 15-year market outperformance, with a $1,000 investment growing to over $21,000 annually. Meanwhile, tech billionaire Michael Saylor criticized MSCI’s proposed delisting rule, calling it "discriminatory," as it could remove three companies—including his firm, Strategy—from global indexes, raising concerns over fairness and market impact. The company also announced participation in the Barclays Global Financial Services Conference.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about MSCI Inc.. News trend score: 62. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
88
Fundamentals
66
Technical
24
Valuation
38
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)
-7%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
MSCI’s dominant overconfidence (47) stems from price momentum vastly exceeding fundamentals (+1.4% vs. +0.1% EPS growth) and a 74% premium to DCF. Herding (32) hints at selective participation, while FOMO (16) reflects momentum-driven buying despite neutral RSI. The 22-point narrative gap (63 vs. 41) suggests traders overestimate positive narratives. The key question: *Is the premium to DCF justified by future growth, or is overconfidence masking valuation risk?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:54 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Strategy asked MSCI to withdraw the proposal or apply changes only prospectively going forward"
"MSCI (NYSE:MSCI) has outperformed the market over the past 15 years by 7.82% on an annualized basis"
📈 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 — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for MSCI reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Thorstein Veblen and Charles Mackay’s relatively high scores suggest they see alignment between the company’s growth and intrinsic value—or at least no obvious speculative bubbles—aligning with their focus on real economic contributions and crowd psychology. Meanwhile, Fisher, Marks (Market Cycle), and Smith, while still positive, temper their enthusiasm, indicating MSCI lacks the exceptional quality, cyclical peak, or long-term mooring they prioritize. The sharp contrast with Graham’s near-zero score—failing defensive metrics—highlights his strict valuation discipline, while Lynch and Loeb’s low scores underscore their caution about growth potential and risk tolerance. Even Bagehot’s extreme low signals liquidity concerns, a red flag for his banking-sector perspective, whereas Livermore and Housel’s similar scores reflect their shared skepticism toward volatility and trend alignment. The spectrum from Veblen’s optimism to Graham’s outright rejection thus hinges on whether one prioritizes qualitative growth, cyclical positioning, or quantitative safety.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 96
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)
🟢 81
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 78
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 57
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 56
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
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)
🟡 36
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 35
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 27
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 26
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 14
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 7
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 3
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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 · 9 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 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
82.4%
Operating Margin
54.7%
Net Margin
38.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
75.8%
ROA
21.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$15.72
Cash
$515.33M
Total Debt
$6.20B
Current Ratio
0.90
Debt/Equity
5.18
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $2.050 |
| 15.5.2026 | $2.050 |
| 14.5.2026 | $2.050 |
| 13.2.2026 | $2.050 |
| 12.2.2026 | $2.050 |
| 14.11.2025 | $1.800 |
| 13.11.2025 | $1.800 |
| 15.8.2025 | $1.800 |
| 14.8.2025 | $1.800 |
| 16.5.2025 | $1.800 |
| 15.5.2025 | $1.800 |
| 14.2.2025 | $1.800 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$540.61
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$317.24
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-41.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
11.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.7% | $1.73B | $1.59B |
| 2 | 9.4% | $1.89B | $1.59B |
| 3 | 7.1% | $2.03B | $1.57B |
| 4 | 4.8% | $2.13B | $1.51B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $2.18B | $1.42B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.55B
Terminal Value
$34.36B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$22.33B
Enterprise Value
$30.00B
Net Debt
$5.69B
Equity Value
$24.31B
*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
$4.45
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.88
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 10 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Barchart · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
CRE Daily · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
CRE Daily · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Business Wire · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
decrypt · 1.9.2026
Stocktwits · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.8.2026
MSCI Inc. (MSCI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
MSCI currently scores 47/100 (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, MSCI's estimated fair value is $317.24, which is 41.3% below the current price of $540.61. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MSCI's technical score is 24/100, 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 75.8% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $317.24 vs. price $540.61 (-41.3%); Current ratio: 0.90; Calmar: 0.02 (3y annualized return 0.5% / max drawdown 26.2%).
Yes — MSCI 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 — 12 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taneja Rajat | Open Market Purchase | 2.9.2026 | 1,786 | +1,786 | $560.00 |
| RIEFLER LINDA H | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.8.2026 | 8 | +8 | — |
| Yang June | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.8.2026 | 2 | +2 | — |
| Matlock Robin | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.8.2026 | 6 | +6 | — |
| Wiechmann Andrew C. | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 450 | -450 | $604.56 |
| Wiechmann Andrew C. | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 22,094 | -450 | $604.56 |
| Taneja Rajat | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 42 | +42 | — |
| Taneja Rajat | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 3,618 | +42 | — |
| Matlock Robin | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 6 | +6 | — |
| RIEFLER LINDA H | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 7 | +7 | — |
| Yang June | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 2 | +2 | — |
| RIEFLER LINDA H | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 20,990 | +7 | — |
| Matlock Robin | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 2,031 | +6 | — |
| Yang June | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 904 | +2 | — |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,122 | +1,122 | $562.47 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 240 | +240 | $560.28 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,238 | +1,238 | $561.56 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 80 | +80 | $565.17 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 120 | +120 | $559.40 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 400 | +400 | $564.42 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 800 | +800 | $563.39 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,728,081 | +120 | $559.40 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,728,321 | +240 | $560.28 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,729,559 | +1,238 | $561.56 |
| Fernandez Henry A | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,730,681 | +1,122 | $562.47 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,170,000 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,188,042 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 42.4% 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