Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$121.30
▲ $0.16 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/15 01:19 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$12.96B
Day Range
$121.20 - $124.40
52-Week Range
$88.25 - $135.89
Beta
—
Next Earnings
23.11.2026
SJM 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.
+12.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 88.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -1.5% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
78/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
-1.7%
Median 40D Outcome
64/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
27%
+5.4% … +8.1%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.1% … -0.1%
🔴 Bearish
67%
-10.2% … -5.4%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 20 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 27% (95% CI 11%–52%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -5.4%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
3 occurrence(s) · 33% 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 | 33% (15%–58%) | -0.1% | -3.3% … +4.5% | +0.1% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -1.0% | -3.5% … +3.0% | +0.3% |
| 20D | 27% (11%–52%) | -5.4% | -7.6% … +2.3% | +0.2% |
| 40D | 33% (15%–58%) | -1.7% | -8.6% … +3.2% | -0.0% |
| 60D | 20% (7%–45%) | -2.8% | -4.6% … -0.9% | -0.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-11 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +4.7% | +3.3% |
| 2018-02-09 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +9.0% | -5.6% |
| 2018-03-26 | 74/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.9% | -12.6% |
| 2025-03-21 | 71/100 | Consolidation | +5.7% | -13.9% |
| 2024-12-16 | 70/100 | Downtrend | -9.1% | -0.8% |
| 2026-03-11 | 69/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -14.1% | -3.8% |
| 2018-11-27 | 68/100 | Consolidation | -13.5% | -2.8% |
| 2023-01-17 | 68/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.4% | -1.1% |
| 2020-05-07 | 67/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -5.4% | -2.3% |
| 2025-09-17 | 67/100 | Downtrend | -1.6% | -4.1% |
| 2022-03-11 | 66/100 | Consolidation | +7.7% | +1.1% |
| 2021-05-27 | 66/100 | Consolidation | -2.3% | -1.8% |
| 2025-11-24 | 65/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -6.1% | +6.5% |
| 2025-04-28 | 65/100 | Consolidation | -0.1% | -4.7% |
| 2026-02-25 | 63/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -10.5% | -4.4% |
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
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
76
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
43
Risk
34
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
28
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING SJM...
Recent media coverage of J.M. Smucker Company highlights its financial resilience amid broader industry challenges. The company raised full-year guidance after strong first-quarter results, showing improved profitability and sales, while its stock has rebounded sharply—up 33% year-to-date. Despite broader concerns about declining impulse snack sales due to high gas prices, Smucker raised its dividend, contrasting with peers like Campbell’s, which cut its dividend amid inflation pressures. Additionally, CEO Mark T. Smucker sold a significant stake, sparking speculation about market confidence.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about J.M. Smucker Company (The). News trend score: 68. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
14
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
43
Fundamentals
28
Technical
43
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+5%
Market Narrative
43
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+7
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peer movements, particularly after today’s underperformance relative to peers. Euphoria persists due to extreme positive sentiment and valuation above long-term averages, while FOMO remains muted despite technical momentum. The large narrative-reality gap (29) implies investors may be overestimating positive catalysts. The key question is whether the herd will sustain underperformance or pivot if peers rally, given the lack of panic or loss aversion signals.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:56 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"‘many consumers have less money—and less appetite—for the chips, snack cakes, meat sticks, and frozen drinks that are often bought impulsively after filling up the tank’"
"‘J. M. Smucker (SJM) lifted full year guidance’"
"‘Mark T. Smucker exercised options and sold 84,821 shares’"
📈 6D 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 — 86/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 1/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish and bearish signals for SJM, reflecting starkly different priorities. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests he’d see this stock as cyclically oversold and ripe for a rebound, aligning with his contrarian, momentum-driven approach. Meanwhile, the majority—including Graham, Loeb, and Bagehot—flag it as a high-risk or structurally weak bet, with Graham’s near-zero score indicating it fails even his most basic defensive filters. The middle ground, from Lynch and Veblen to Marks and Housel, leans cautious, noting either overpriced growth or mixed signals, while Livermore and Schwager’s neutral stances imply no clear edge. The contrast underscores whether the stock’s volatility or speculative hype (per Mackay) could justify a contrarian play or if its instability (per Bagehot or Graham) makes it a trap for the unwary.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 86
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)
🟢 77
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 53
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 48
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 39
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 39
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 37
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 34
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 27
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 8
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 1
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
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
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 (3 bullish · 7 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.
The stock is in a clear uptrend 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
33.5%
Operating Margin
4.0%
Net Margin
-1.5%
EBITDA Margin
4.0%
ROE
-2.5%
ROA
-0.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.30
Cash
$58.60M
Total Debt
$6.54B
Current Ratio
0.78
Debt/Equity
1.18
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $1.120 |
| 15.5.2026 | $1.100 |
| 14.5.2026 | $1.100 |
| 13.2.2026 | $1.100 |
| 12.2.2026 | $1.100 |
| 14.11.2025 | $1.100 |
| 13.11.2025 | $1.100 |
| 15.8.2025 | $1.100 |
| 14.8.2025 | $1.100 |
| 16.5.2025 | $1.080 |
| 15.5.2025 | $1.080 |
| 14.2.2025 | $1.080 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 11 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Barrons.com · 4.9.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 4.9.2026
MT Newswires · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Motley Fool · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
StockStory · 3.9.2026
J.M. Smucker Company (The) (SJM) 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.
SJM 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.
SJM's technical score is 43/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 88.8%; Free cash flow growth: 41.6%; Net income growth: 88.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -1.5% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.78.
Yes — SJM 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 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ferguson Robert D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 1,121 | -1,121 | $131.42 |
| Knudsen Jeannette L | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 1,584 | -1,584 | $131.42 |
| Penrose Jill R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 1,461 | -1,461 | $131.42 |
| SMUCKER MARK T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 84,821 | -84,821 | $108.90 |
| SMUCKER MARK T | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 84,821 | -84,821 | $131.39 |
| SMUCKER MARK T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 84,821 | +84,821 | $108.90 |
| Ferguson Robert D | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,522 | -2,522 | $132.41 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 38,699 | -11,093 | $131.91 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 49,792 | -7,389 | $132.26 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 0 | -7,389 | $108.90 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 57,181 | +11,093 | $125.82 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 46,088 | +7,389 | $108.90 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 11,093 | -11,093 | $131.91 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 7,389 | -7,389 | $108.90 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 7,389 | -7,389 | $132.26 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 11,093 | +11,093 | $125.82 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 11,093 | -11,093 | $125.82 |
| Marshall Tucker H | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 7,389 | +7,389 | $108.90 |
| AMIN TARANG | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 246.67 | +246.67 | — |
| Chung Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 228.54 | +228.54 | — |
| Perry Kirk | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 217.66 | +217.66 | — |
| Abramo Mercedes | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 217.66 | +217.66 | — |
| AMIN TARANG | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 7,346 | +247 | — |
| Perry Kirk | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 22,991 | +218 | — |
| Chung Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 506 | +229 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,508,070 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 5,634,296 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 50.1% 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