Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$376.29
▲ $1.03 (+0.3%)
Market data updated: 09/17 01:36 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$337.76B
Day Range
$375.26 - $377.61
52-Week Range
$255.97 - $461.62
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.10.2026
UNH is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+11.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/32 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
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is above the 200-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $279.98 vs. price $376.29 (-25.6%)
Fair Value
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
39
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
37
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
19
Risk
34
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
46
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING UNH...
Recent media coverage of UnitedHealth Group has primarily focused on its strong stock performance, with shares rising **39.4% in six months** and outperforming the S&P 500 by **25.4%**, driven by solid quarterly results. Analysts highlight optimism over its financial health, though concerns remain about Medicare Advantage plan disruptions—insurers have already notified Wall Street about plan cancellations effective December 31, leaving members unaware until October. Dividend discussions and broader market comparisons also feature, but no major operational or scandalous developments are reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about UnitedHealth Group. News trend score: 80. Reason: 10 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
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
76
Fundamentals
46
Technical
19
Valuation
38
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-6%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+26
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
UNH’s psychology is dominated by anchoring (47%), where traders fixate on the 2.7% support level, despite overconfidence (42%) from strong valuation (+43% above DCF) and momentum decoupling from fundamentals. The narrative gap (44 points) suggests traders overestimate positive developments relative to reality. Key uncertainty: whether anchoring persists or overconfidence drives further price extension. Low panic (4) and herding (0) imply no immediate liquidity crisis, but FOMO (14) remains muted by subdued volume.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:30 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"UnitedHealth’s 37.1% return over the past six months has outpaced the S&P 500 by 25.4% (Yahoo, 9)"
"Insurers spent the summer telling Wall Street exactly which Medicare Advantage plans are disappearing on December 31 (Yahoo, 5)"
"Barron’s Aug 2026 dividend stock picks include UnitedHealth as a ‘safer’ high-yield dog (SeekingAlpha, 6)"
"Less paperwork may improve access, but investors must watch whether faster approvals weaken medical-cost discipline (Yahoo, 12)"
📈 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 95/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that Nelson’s cycle‑position framework and Schwager’s reward‑risk discipline produce very high scores (95 and 67), suggesting a favorable oversold environment and a solid setup, while Mackay’s crowd‑excitement view also leans positive at 63. In contrast, Graham’s defensive criteria and enterprising safety margins flag the stock as fundamentally unattractive, yielding scores of 7 and 0, and Marks, Loeb, and Housel emphasize mid‑cycle positioning, valuation risk, and volatility with mid‑range to low scores. The efficient‑market view of Malkiel & Bogle (48) and Livermore’s lack of clear trend (46) further reflect a cautious, near‑neutral stance, highlighting the divergence between momentum‑oriented and value‑oriented methodologies. Overall, the spread of scores—from strong bullish signals to strong cautions—illustrates how differing emphases on cycle timing, risk, growth quality, and valuation drive contrasting conclusions about UNH.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 95
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)
🟢 67
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 67
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 60
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 46
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 46
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 40
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 35
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 29
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 27
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 25
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)
🔴 19
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 19
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
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
🔴 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 (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.
High 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
88.7%
Operating Margin
4.2%
Net Margin
2.7%
EBITDA Margin
5.2%
ROE
12.0%
ROA
3.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$13.28
Cash
$24.36B
Total Debt
$78.39B
Current Ratio
0.79
Debt/Equity
0.78
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.9.2026 | $2.320 |
| 15.6.2026 | $2.320 |
| 14.6.2026 | $2.320 |
| 9.3.2026 | $2.210 |
| 8.3.2026 | $2.210 |
| 8.12.2025 | $2.210 |
| 7.12.2025 | $2.210 |
| 15.9.2025 | $2.210 |
| 14.9.2025 | $2.210 |
| 16.6.2025 | $2.210 |
| 15.6.2025 | $2.210 |
| 10.3.2025 | $2.100 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$376.29
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$279.98
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-25.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
11.4%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.4% | $17.91B | $16.43B |
| 2 | 9.2% | $19.55B | $16.45B |
| 3 | 6.9% | $20.90B | $16.14B |
| 4 | 4.7% | $21.89B | $15.51B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $22.44B | $14.58B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$16.07B
Terminal Value
$353.84B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$229.97B
Enterprise Value
$309.09B
Net Debt
$54.02B
Equity Value
$255.06B
*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
$109.87
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$33.90
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 5 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Trefis · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
UnitedHealth Group (UNH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, 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.
UNH currently scores 39/100 (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, UNH's estimated fair value is $279.98, which is 25.6% below the current price of $376.29. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UNH's technical score is 19/100, 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: Price is above the 200-day average; Gross margin: 88.7% — strong; Revenue growth (last year): 11.8%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $279.98 vs. price $376.29 (-25.6%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.79.
Yes — UNH 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 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeVeydt Wayne S | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 1,208.895 | -1,208.895 | $399.66 |
| Conway Patrick Hugh | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 15,328 | -1,169 | $390.00 |
| Conway Patrick Hugh | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 1,169 | -1,169 | $390.00 |
| Stankiewicz Dennis Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 11.8.2026 | 233.402 | -233.402 | $402.19 |
| Stankiewicz Dennis Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 11.8.2026 | 10,058 | -233 | $402.19 |
| Conway Patrick Hugh | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 500 | -500 | $410.00 |
| Conway Patrick Hugh | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 16,497 | -500 | $410.00 |
| GARCIA PAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 132 | +132 | — |
| Baker Charles D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 220 | +220 | — |
| MONTGOMERY RICE VALERIE MD | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 220 | +220 | — |
| Gil Kristen | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 206 | +206 | — |
| GARCIA PAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 88 | +88 | — |
| Noseworthy John H | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 206 | +206 | — |
| MCNABB FREDERICK WILLIAM III | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 250 | +250 | — |
| FLYNN TIMOTHY PATRICK | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 225 | +225 | — |
| Gottlieb Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 210 | +210 | — |
| GARCIA PAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 3,818 | +132 | — |
| GARCIA PAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 3,906 | +88 | — |
| Gottlieb Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 659 | +210 | — |
| FLYNN TIMOTHY PATRICK | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 10,875 | +225 | — |
| Baker Charles D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 2,396 | +220 | — |
| Noseworthy John H | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 7,616 | +206 | — |
| MONTGOMERY RICE VALERIE MD | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 7,876 | +220 | — |
| Gil Kristen | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 2,617 | +206 | — |
| MCNABB FREDERICK WILLIAM III | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 15,462 | +250 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
15,287,263 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 15,085,300 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
35.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 41.9% 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