Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Financials · ·
$48.56
▲ $0.11 (+0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/19 09:43 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$59.32B
Day Range
$48.20 - $48.87
52-Week Range
$40.78 - $56.20
Beta
—
Next Earnings
16.10.2026
Support
$47.64
Resistance
$54.22
TFC is a stock from the Financials sector — Banks, insurance, and asset management — profitability sensitive to interest rates and credit cycles.
+5.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/23 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
🔴 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
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
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
43
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
57
Quality
50
Value
55
Momentum
24
Risk
50
Sentiment
38
Fundamental
46
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING TFC...
The provided sources do not mention **Truist Financial** directly. The headlines focus on unrelated companies, including Huntington Bank’s leadership changes, stock performance analyses for firms like UiPath, Lululemon, Eos Energy, GitLab, and DigitalOcean, as well as financial commentary on American Express and other tech/retail stocks. No recent media coverage of Truist Financial is reflected in these sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Truist Financial. News trend score: 38. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are negative, versus 4 positive.
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)
50
Psychology
62
Fundamentals
46
Technical
24
Valuation
55
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
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.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-13
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior reflects traders reacting to TFC’s relative underperformance, aligning with peers’ declines. Anchoring at 2.9% above support may reinforce cautious buying, while low FOMO/Euphoria scores indicate no extreme momentum-driven crowding. The key question is whether the slight outperformance gap persists or if traders pivot toward anchoring as support tests. Narrative-reality divergence (gap: +5) hints at potential misalignment between sentiment and fundamentals.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 09:21 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"average analyst fair value estimate for Eos Energy shifted from about US$7.89 to about US$6.67"
"Wall Street raised targets after strong second-quarter performances"
"Keith Lerner, CIO at Truist, discusses current market moves"
📈 7D 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 — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 19/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on his documented principles, Charles Mackay’s model gives a high score (96) and notes no crowd mania, while Samuel Nelson’s assessment (89) sees a favorable cycle position suggesting the stock is closer to oversold than overbought. Benjamin Graham’s defensive view (71) and Howard Marks (69) both find the price reasonably priced, yet Graham’s enterprising criteria (60) and Peter Lynch (57) indicate only modest discounts and that much of the growth is already reflected in the price. The more quantitative lenses of Bogle/Malkiel (42) and Jack Schwager (40) see little edge over an index, and the trend‑following rule of Jesse Livermore (27) and Thorstein Veblen’s cultural critique (20) turn strongly negative. Overall, the scores span from strong support to clear skepticism, reflecting each methodology’s emphasis on crowd sentiment, cycle timing, valuation depth, growth expectations, and market‑efficiency or trend considerations.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 98
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)
🟢 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 72
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 71
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)
🟢 67
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 62
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 61
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 58
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 57
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 45
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 38
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 33
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 20
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 19
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
Based on the last 280 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.
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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
8.1%
ROA
1.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.87
Cash
$36.38B
Total Debt
$69.80B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
1.07
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $0.520 |
| 8.5.2026 | $0.520 |
| 7.5.2026 | $0.520 |
| 13.2.2026 | $0.520 |
| 12.2.2026 | $0.520 |
| 14.11.2025 | $0.520 |
| 13.11.2025 | $0.520 |
| 8.8.2025 | $0.520 |
| 7.8.2025 | $0.520 |
| 9.5.2025 | $0.520 |
| 8.5.2025 | $0.520 |
| 14.2.2025 | $0.520 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$50.04
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$35.93
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 4 positive, 10 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Truist Financial (TFC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, 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.
TFC currently scores 43/100 (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.
TFC'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; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 13.7%; P/E: 12.7.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — TFC 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lyons Michael P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 84,951 | +84,951 | — |
| Lyons Michael P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 266,990 | +266,990 | — |
| Wilson Donta L | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 13,280 | -13,280 | $51.85 |
| Wilson Donta L | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 56,009 | -13,280 | $51.85 |
| Bessant Catherine P | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.7.2026 | 2,338 | +2,338 | — |
| Bessant Catherine P | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.7.2026 | 2,338 | +2,338 | — |
| Boyer K. David Jr. | Open Market Sale | 23.7.2026 | 3,986 | -3,986 | $50.70 |
| Boyer K. David Jr. | Open Market Sale | 23.7.2026 | 10,270 | -3,986 | $50.70 |
| ROGERS WILLIAM H JR | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 13,250 | -13,250 | $52.36 |
| ROGERS WILLIAM H JR | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 0 | -13,250 | $52.36 |
| Bender Bradley D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 9,115 | -9,115 | $46.87 |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 16,149 | -16,149 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 16,149 | +16,149 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 21,896 | +16,149 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 12,781 | -9,115 | $46.87 |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.6.2026 | 0 | -16,149 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 2,306 | -2,306 | $43.83 |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.3.2026 | 4,123 | -4,123 | — |
| Stengel Scott A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 3,001 | -3,001 | $43.83 |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.3.2026 | 803 | -803 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.3.2026 | 2,895 | -2,895 | — |
| Bender Bradley D | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 1,594 | -1,594 | $43.83 |
| Bender Bradley D | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.3.2026 | 2,895 | +2,895 | — |
| Lesher Kristin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 7,433 | -7,433 | $43.83 |
| Powell Cynthia B | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.3.2026 | 1,929 | +1,929 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
25,674,053 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 27,703,657 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
62.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.7% 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