Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$130.44
▼ $3.22 (-2.4%)
Market data updated: 09/18 06:01 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$129.82 - $132.26
52-Week Range
$129.82 - $171.48
Beta
—
Next Earnings
08.10.2026
PEP is a stock from the Consumer Defensive sector — Food, beverages, and household products — steady demand even in a recession, since these are essential consumer goods.
-7.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
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
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
80/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
-0.6%
Median 40D Outcome
66/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+2.0% … +7.9%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.8% … +0.8%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-4.6% … -2.3%
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 +1.4%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
1 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Echo #2 — Momentum Breakout
1 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 | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.8% | -0.5% … +3.0% | +0.0% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +1.8% | -0.3% … +2.9% | +0.3% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +1.4% | -2.4% … +3.3% | +0.5% |
| 40D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.6% | -5.0% … +6.6% | +0.6% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -1.3% | -4.7% … +6.3% | +1.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-15 | 80/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +10.7% | +2.4% |
| 2023-08-22 | 80/100 | ✓ Downtrend | +1.5% | -4.8% |
| 2021-01-22 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -4.8% | +5.1% |
| 2024-12-17 | 77/100 | Downtrend | -5.1% | -4.6% |
| 2025-03-25 | 77/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -2.3% | -11.3% |
| 2019-08-01 | 77/100 | Consolidation | +7.0% | +7.5% |
| 2021-02-22 | 76/100 | Downtrend | +4.4% | +10.2% |
| 2024-01-22 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +2.1% | +2.6% |
| 2024-11-06 | 75/100 | Downtrend | -2.6% | -11.6% |
| 2025-11-10 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +1.4% | +19.5% |
| 2025-01-08 | 74/100 | ✓ Downtrend | -1.3% | -2.3% |
| 2026-01-08 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +22.3% | +9.9% |
| 2026-06-22 | 74/100 | Downtrend | -4.1% | -4.5% |
| 2026-03-24 | 73/100 | Consolidation | +2.1% | -5.7% |
| 2026-06-04 | 73/100 | Downtrend | +0.8% | -1.3% |
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 XLP (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
41
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
40
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
18
Risk
36
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
61
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING PEP...
Recent media coverage of PepsiCo has primarily focused on its strategic pivot into the **$271 billion fresh-food market**, driven by consumer demand for protein-rich, fiber-heavy, and less-processed alternatives. The company is positioning itself to capitalize on shifting dietary trends, contrasting with rival Coca-Cola in investor comparisons centered on dividend yields and stock performance. While broader dividend stock discussions mention PepsiCo, no new operational or financial details beyond market expansion plans are explicitly highlighted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about PepsiCo. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 7 vs. 7 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
23
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
92
Fundamentals
61
Technical
18
Valuation
50
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-8%
Market Narrative
36
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+0
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for PEP suggests a **narrative-reality disconnect** (gap: 10) where traders appear anchored to a near-term support level (3.4% above) rather than reacting to momentum or peer performance. The lack of dominant bias (psychologyScore: 32) implies cautious, non-emotional positioning, with no clear panic or FOMO driving decisions. The key question is whether traders will hold near support or break away—especially if volume trends or sentiment shift. Low volatility (0.89x ATR) further signals a measured, non-extreme environment.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:52 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Coca-Cola vs PepsiCo: What's the Better Dividend Stock to Buy Right Now?"
"Three Dividend Kings with very different yields and coverage profiles could shift that math entirely in a retiree's favor"
"The stock has drastically underperformed the market over the past five years."
"PepsiCo's snack momentum is building on international demand, innovation and affordability"
📈 15D 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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies for PEP show a stark divide between those focused on macro trends and market psychology versus those prioritizing fundamental value or growth quality. Charles Mackay and Samuel Armstrong Nelson, both attuned to crowd behavior and cyclical positioning, rate PEP highly—Mackay sees no mania, while Nelson finds the stock oversold relative to its cycle. In contrast, value-oriented investors like Benjamin Graham and Philip Fisher dismiss it outright, with Graham calling it statistically overpriced even for his enterprising investor criteria and Fisher noting a lack of growth quality. Meanwhile, trend-followers like Jesse Livermore and Jack Schwager reject it entirely, with Livermore citing a negative trend and Schwager’s disciplined wizards seeing no setup. The middle ground—represented by Howard Marks (who flags high expectations) and Morgan Housel (who calls it holdable but not effortless)—suggests PEP may be a mediocre fit for most systematic approaches, caught between cyclical optimism and fundamental skepticism.
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)
🟢 100
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 84
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)
🟡 61
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 53
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 41
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 37
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
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)
🔴 35
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)
🔴 34
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 27
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 23
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 18
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 12
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 9
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)
🔴 7
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
🔴 2
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 · 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.
A trading range after a decline, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of an accumulation phase.
Low confidence
$129.82
Range Bottom
$145.90
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
54.1%
Operating Margin
12.2%
Net Margin
8.8%
EBITDA Margin
15.9%
ROE
40.4%
ROA
7.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.02
Cash
$9.16B
Total Debt
$49.18B
Current Ratio
0.85
Debt/Equity
2.41
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 4.9.2026 | $1.480 |
| 5.6.2026 | $1.480 |
| 4.6.2026 | $1.480 |
| 6.3.2026 | $1.423 |
| 5.3.2026 | $1.423 |
| 5.12.2025 | $1.423 |
| 4.12.2025 | $1.423 |
| 5.9.2025 | $1.423 |
| 4.9.2025 | $1.423 |
| 6.6.2025 | $1.423 |
| 5.6.2025 | $1.423 |
| 7.3.2025 | $1.355 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$14.86
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.72
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 6 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
PepsiCo (PEP) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, 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.
PEP currently scores 41/100 (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.
PEP's technical score is 18/100, 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; ATR: 1.8% of price; Return on equity (ROE): 40.4% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.85; Calmar: -0.34 (3y annualized return -10.1% / max drawdown 30.1%).
Yes — PEP 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| POHLAD ROBERT C | Other Transaction | 6.8.2026 | 79,731 | +79,731 | — |
| POHLAD ROBERT C | Other Transaction | 6.8.2026 | 900,000 | -900,000 | — |
| POHLAD ROBERT C | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 398.323 | +398.323 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 76.859 | +76.859 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 1,320 | +1,320 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 1,320 | -1,320 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 5,688 | +5,688 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 5,688 | -5,688 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 20,012 | +5,688 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 0 | -1,320 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 21,332 | +1,320 | — |
| Krishnan Ramkumar | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 2,777 | +77 | — |
| Flavell David | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 2,900 | -2,900 | $139.54 |
| Flavell David | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 74,825 | -2,900 | $139.54 |
| Willemsen Eugene | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 809 | +809 | — |
| Willemsen Eugene | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 540 | +540 | — |
| Willemsen Eugene | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 64,216 | +809 | — |
| Willemsen Eugene | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 64,756 | +540 | — |
| Gibbs David W | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 70.661 | +70.661 | $141.52 |
| Bailey Jennifer | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 423.968 | +423.968 | $141.52 |
| VASELLA DANIEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 423.968 | +423.968 | $141.52 |
| Diamond Susan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 565.291 | +565.291 | $141.52 |
| VASELLA DANIEL | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 91,896 | +424 | $141.52 |
| Gibbs David W | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 1,605 | +71 | $141.52 |
| Diamond Susan M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 8,267 | +565 | $141.52 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
21,279,663 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 29,388,790 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
28.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 42.6% 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