Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
$34.40
▼ $0.51 (-1.5%)
Market data updated: 09/17 08:03 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$11.18B
Day Range
$34.33 - $35.14
52-Week Range
$32.94 - $42.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
UDR is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-6.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 334.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $14.56 vs. price $34.40 (-57.7%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (70/100), 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.
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
42
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
70
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
6
Risk
36
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
57
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING UDR...
Recent media coverage on UDR, Inc., a multifamily real estate investment trust, focuses on analyst updates, dividend announcements, and corporate events. Multiple financial firms
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about UDR, Inc.. News trend score: 56. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
96
Fundamentals
57
Technical
6
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.
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.
Price (3M)
-8%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests strong anchoring as trading activity clusters near support, sitting just 1.5% above it. Evidence indicates active anchoring bias alongside overconfidence, given the stock trades 141% above DCF fair value despite negative momentum. An RSI of 29 and elevated volume of 1.48x highlight downward price pressure. The key open question is whether support holds or if market behavior shifts upon breaking technical levels.
Updated: 09/15/2026, 05:42 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Wells Fargo lowers price target from $44 to $43"
"UDR Inc's dividend performance and sustainability assessed"
"significant refinancing risk from a short maturity wall"
"oversupply through 2027, rent growth cools"
📈 10D 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 — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for UDR reflects a clash between cyclical optimism and fundamental caution. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score suggests he’d see this stock as undervalued in its market cycle, while Peter Lynch and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) also lean bullish, viewing it as a growth opportunity or early-cycle play. However, Fisher, Graham, and Bagehot’s near-zero scores reveal deep skepticism—Fisher dismisses the lack of quality/growth, while Graham and Bagehot flag liquidity and valuation risks as dealbreakers. Even moderate voices like Housel and Malkiel/Bogle warn that the stock isn’t a slam-dunk, with the latter preferring passive indexing. Meanwhile, Livermore’s outright rejection highlights a technical misalignment, while Veblen’s caution underscores uncertainty about profitability. The debate hinges on whether UDR’s cyclical appeal or growth potential outweighs its valuation and risk hurdles.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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)
🟢 84
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 80
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 76
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 73
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 62
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)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 44
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 42
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 42
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 33
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 27
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
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
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
🔴 0
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 278 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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
65.9%
Operating Margin
32.3%
Net Margin
22.1%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
11.5%
ROA
3.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.13
Cash
$1.22M
Total Debt
$5.82B
Current Ratio
0.00
Debt/Equity
1.77
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 17.8.2026 | $0.145 |
| 17.7.2026 | $0.145 |
| 16.7.2026 | $0.145 |
| 15.4.2026 | $0.435 |
| 14.4.2026 | $0.435 |
| 12.1.2026 | $0.430 |
| 11.1.2026 | $0.430 |
| 9.10.2025 | $0.430 |
| 8.10.2025 | $0.430 |
| 10.7.2025 | $0.430 |
| 9.7.2025 | $0.430 |
| 10.4.2025 | $0.430 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$34.40
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$14.56
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-57.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
4.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.1% | $676.90M | $621.01M |
| 2 | 3.7% | $702.12M | $590.96M |
| 3 | 3.3% | $725.41M | $560.15M |
| 4 | 2.9% | $746.51M | $528.85M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $765.17M | $497.31M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$650.03M
Terminal Value
$12.07B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$7.84B
Enterprise Value
$10.64B
Net Debt
$5.82B
Equity Value
$4.82B
*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
$10.02
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$12.46
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 9 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 22.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
UDR, Inc. (UDR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
UDR currently scores 42/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, UDR's estimated fair value is $14.56, which is 57.7% below the current price of $34.40. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UDR's technical score is 6/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 334.6%; Net income growth: 321.6%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $14.56 vs. price $34.40 (-57.7%); Current ratio: 0.00; Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -2.9% / max drawdown 28.8%).
Yes — UDR 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bragg David D. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 23.7.2026 | 2,134 | -2,134 | $39.48 |
| Bragg David D. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 23.7.2026 | 27,892 | -2,134 | $39.48 |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Open Market Sale | 5.6.2026 | 80,000 | -80,000 | $39.25 |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Open Market Sale | 5.6.2026 | 810,455 | -80,000 | $39.25 |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.2.2026 | 92,646 | +92,646 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 6,130 | -6,130 | — |
| Bragg David D. | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 790 | -790 | — |
| Lacy Michael D | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 5,198 | -5,198 | — |
| Hofmeister Tracy L | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 30,614 | -30,614 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 7,376 | -7,376 | — |
| Bragg David D. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 12.2.2026 | 1,099 | -1,099 | $38.17 |
| Lacy Michael D | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 2,449 | -2,449 | — |
| Hofmeister Tracy L | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 393 | -393 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 1,071,530 | -1,071,530 | — |
| Bragg David D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.2.2026 | 6,741 | +6,741 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Tax Withholding in Shares | 12.2.2026 | 26,907 | -26,907 | $38.17 |
| Lacy Michael D | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 49,091 | -49,091 | — |
| BENSON KEITH | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.2.2026 | 12,330 | +12,330 | — |
| BENSON KEITH | Tax Withholding in Shares | 12.2.2026 | 2,845 | -2,845 | $38.17 |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.2.2026 | 917,362 | +92,646 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Tax Withholding in Shares | 12.2.2026 | 890,455 | -26,907 | $38.17 |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 1,270,079 | -6,130 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 1,262,703 | -7,376 | — |
| TOOMEY THOMAS W | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 1,856,510 | -1,071,530 | — |
| Hofmeister Tracy L | Disposition to the Company | 12.2.2026 | 55,349 | -393 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
9,319,050 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 8,164,121 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
18.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 39.2% 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