Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$130.01
▼ $1.83 (-1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/30 08:34 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$9.87B
Day Range
$129.93 - $132.60
52-Week Range
$103.38 - $153.32
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$129.93
Resistance
$153.32
+9.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/24 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $346.74 vs. price $130.01 (+166.7%)
Fair Value
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 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
53
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
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
68
Quality
55
Value
67
Momentum
16
Risk
56
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
50
Institutional
11
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Everyone's writing about UMB Financial Corporation. News trend score: 100. Reason: 14 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
23
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
99
Fundamentals
50
Technical
16
Valuation
67
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 significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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 (3M)
-10%
Market Narrative
44
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
-8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles, the model estimates that value‑focused frameworks such as Smith, Nelson and Graham’s defensive criteria assign very high scores (100‑89) and view the stock as a long‑term hold or defensively attractive. In contrast, investors who stress price trends, growth justification or market efficiency give more muted or negative readings, with Livermore (40) flagging a downtrend, Veblen (23) labeling it growth for its own sake, Lynch (18) rejecting the GARP test, and the efficient‑market view (47) seeing little edge over an index. Mid‑range assessments from Marks, Loeb, Schwager and Housel (around 68‑85) acknowledge reasonable risk‑reward and compound‑oriented qualities but stop short of a strong endorsement. Finally, Fisher and Bagehot return maximum scores yet explicitly note insufficient fundamental or balance‑sheet data, illustrating that the lack of information prevents a full application of their methods.
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 100
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 89
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 85
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 69
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 69
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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)
🟡 47
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 47
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 23
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 18
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 288 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 10 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
9.1%
ROA
1.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$9.35
Cash
$7.77B
Total Debt
$474.23M
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.06
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.9.2026 | $0.500 |
| 10.6.2026 | $0.430 |
| 10.3.2026 | $0.430 |
| 10.12.2025 | $0.430 |
| 10.9.2025 | $0.400 |
| 10.6.2025 | $0.400 |
| 10.3.2025 | $0.400 |
| 10.12.2024 | $0.400 |
| 10.9.2024 | $0.390 |
| 10.6.2024 | $0.390 |
| 8.3.2024 | $0.390 |
| 8.12.2023 | $0.390 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$130.01
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$346.74
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+166.7%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $1.08B | $987.08M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $1.16B | $979.16M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $1.24B | $954.46M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $1.29B | $913.96M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.32B | $859.45M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$978.11M
Terminal Value
$20.85B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$13.55B
Enterprise Value
$18.25B
Net Debt
$-7.30B
Equity Value
$25.54B
*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
$104.43
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$72.85
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 14 positive, 2 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Benzinga · 28.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.8.2026
Yahoo · 8.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Yahoo · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 3.8.2026
Yahoo · 1.8.2026
Yahoo · 1.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.7.2026
UMB Financial Corporation (UMBF) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 53/100, 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.
UMBF currently scores 53/100 (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, UMBF's estimated fair value is $346.74, which is 166.7% above the current price of $130.01. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UMBF's technical score is 16/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $346.74 vs. price $130.01 (+166.7%); Free cash flow growth: 376.5%; Net income growth: 59.2%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; RSI 28.6 — oversold.
Yes — UMBF 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 — 2 purchases and 17 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRAVES GREG M | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 40,463 | +573 | $139.60 |
| Peterman Tamara | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 10,680 | +394 | $139.60 |
| Shankar Ram | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 30,389 | -2,000 | $151.61 |
| Terry Thomas S | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 30,689 | -5,713 | $151.77 |
| Murphy Susan G | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 10,635 | -902 | $145.50 |
| Murphy Susan G | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 11,537 | -475 | $145.66 |
| Odgers David Carl | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 6,538 | -145 | $147.30 |
| Mason Phillip James | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 8,894 | -800 | $147.00 |
| Newton Nikki Farentino | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 11,982 | -1,999 | $148.60 |
| Newton Nikki Farentino | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 11,981 | -1 | $148.72 |
| Wilson Uma | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 20,270 | -4,145 | $148.00 |
| KEMPER J MARINER | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 1,491,138 | -15,062 | $148.55 |
| KEMPER J MARINER | Gift | 3.8.2026 | 9,761 | +9,761 | — |
| KEMPER J MARINER | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 5,561 | -4,200 | $147.27 |
| Gallagher Kevin Charles | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 11,863 | -360 | $145.13 |
| Beaird Robert Brian | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 8,943 | -1,600 | $144.40 |
| Wilson Uma | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 25,337 | +922 | $75.25 |
| Wilson Uma | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 24,415 | -922 | $133.05 |
| Wilson Uma | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 0 | -922 | — |
| Gallagher Kevin Charles | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 12,223 | -381 | $132.88 |
| Rine James D | Open Market Sale | 9.6.2026 | 62,520 | -7,172 | $132.49 |
| Rine James D | Open Market Sale | 9.6.2026 | 61,446 | -1,074 | $133.22 |
| BEERY ROBIN C | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,259 | +116 | $129.24 |
| Davidson Janine | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 4,942 | +116 | $129.24 |
| Gallagher Kevin Charles | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 12,604 | +116 | $129.24 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,634,556 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 3,425,160 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 59.6% 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