Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$95.36
▲ $1.11 (+1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/19 03:19 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$18.19B
Day Range
$93.72 - $96.17
52-Week Range
$79.12 - $106.88
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$87.87
Resistance
$102.86
ZBH 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.
-4.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/31 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
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.19 (3y annualized return -7.8% / max drawdown 40.0%)
Risk
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
52
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
45
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
47
Risk
48
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
59
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING ZBH...
Recent media coverage of Zimmer Biomet has primarily focused on its stock performance and market positioning. After reporting earnings, the company saw a modest 1.8% increase, sparking investor speculation about future growth. Analysts discuss its profitability and fundamentals, questioning whether its valuation reflects long-term sustainability or potential business model challenges. While Zimmer Biomet is noted for its strong sales growth—driven by transformation, research and development, and acquisitions—some comparisons highlight its premium pricing in the competitive surgical robotics market.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Zimmer Biomet. News trend score: 56. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 7 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
37
Fundamentals
59
Technical
47
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.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+8%
Market Narrative
40
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+0
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests investors are aligning ZBH’s recent decline (-3.9%) with broader peer weakness (-2.7%), implying passive mimicking rather than active conviction. The narrative gap (58 vs. 40) hints at a disconnect where optimism (e.g., +8.9% above 200-day avg) persists despite weak momentum, potentially masking underlying caution. Mild euphoria and overconfidence may reflect residual optimism from valuation metrics (+3% above DCF), but the lack of panic or FOMO signals suggests no extreme emotional response. The key question is whether this herding reflects a rational reassessment or a delayed reaction to deteriorating fundamentals.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 09:51 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Zimmer Biomet sees strong constant currency sales growth driven by transformation"
"Zimmer Biomet announced a quarterly cash dividend of $0.24 per share for Q3 2026"
📈 9D 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 — 91/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 22/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for ZBH reflects deep methodological contrasts. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score and bullish cycle positioning contrast sharply with Thorstein Veblen’s low score, flagging it as a speculative growth play—Nelson prioritizes market timing and oversold conditions, while Veblen distrusts unearned growth hype. Meanwhile, Edgar Lawrence Smith’s ‘buy-and-hold’ endorsement aligns with his long-term, fundamentalist approach, whereas Philip Fisher and Peter Lynch’s low scores reveal their strict growth-quality thresholds aren’t met. Defensive investors like Benjamin Graham and Howard Marks (both scoring below 55) see it as risky or overvalued, while cyclical strategists like Marks (market cycle) or Livermore’s trend-averse stance further dampen enthusiasm. Even the efficient-market camp dismisses it as unexceptional, highlighting how ZBH’s mixed signals—appealing to some as a cyclical rebound but failing others’ core filters—create a fractured consensus.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 91
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)
🟢 77
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 70
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
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 61
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 59
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 54
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 53
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 48
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 45
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 43
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)
🟡 41
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 39
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 36
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 22
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
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 (3 bullish · 5 bearish · 3 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
69.7%
Operating Margin
13.3%
Net Margin
8.6%
EBITDA Margin
26.6%
ROE
5.6%
ROA
3.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.56
Cash
$591.90M
Total Debt
$7.52B
Current Ratio
1.98
Debt/Equity
0.59
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 25.6.2026 | $0.240 |
| 24.6.2026 | $0.240 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.240 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.240 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.240 |
| 29.12.2025 | $0.240 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.240 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.240 |
| 26.6.2025 | $0.240 |
| 25.6.2025 | $0.240 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.240 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.240 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$95.36
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$91.29
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-4.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
5.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5.9% | $1.56B | $1.43B |
| 2 | 5.0% | $1.64B | $1.38B |
| 3 | 4.2% | $1.71B | $1.32B |
| 4 | 3.3% | $1.76B | $1.25B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.81B | $1.17B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.47B
Terminal Value
$28.49B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$18.52B
Enterprise Value
$25.07B
Net Debt
$6.93B
Equity Value
$18.14B
*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
$63.90
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$9.90
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 5 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
StockStory · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
MedTech Dive · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Trefis · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 7.9.2026
Zimmer Biomet (ZBH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
ZBH currently scores 52/100 (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, ZBH's estimated fair value is $91.29, which is 4.3% below the current price of $95.36. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ZBH's technical score is 47/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 1.98; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.19 (3y annualized return -7.8% / max drawdown 40.0%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -19.9%; Net income growth: -22.0%.
Yes — ZBH 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 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phipps Chad F | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | $98.35 |
| Desai Chintan | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 10,168 | +10,168 | — |
| Desai Chintan | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 10,168 | +10,168 | — |
| Thornal Kevin R | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.8.2026 | 9,957 | -9,957 | — |
| Thornal Kevin R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 4,266 | -4,266 | $92.68 |
| Thornal Kevin R | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.8.2026 | 9,957 | +9,957 | — |
| Thornal Kevin R | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.8.2026 | 9,957 | +9,957 | — |
| Thornal Kevin R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 5,691 | -4,266 | $92.68 |
| Thornal Kevin R | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.8.2026 | 19,913 | -9,957 | — |
| Shapiro Louis | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 158.684 | +158.684 | — |
| HAGEMANN ROBERT | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 317.369 | +317.369 | — |
| Farrell Michael J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 432.776 | +432.776 | — |
| Hilado Maria Teresa | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 389.498 | +389.498 | — |
| HIGGINS ARTHUR J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 317.369 | +317.369 | — |
| Kurdikar Devdatt | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 180.323 | +180.323 | — |
| Kolli Sreelakshmi | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 180.323 | +180.323 | — |
| HIGGINS ARTHUR J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 37,675 | +317 | — |
| HAGEMANN ROBERT | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 33,269 | +317 | — |
| Farrell Michael J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 19,607 | +433 | — |
| Hilado Maria Teresa | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 12,984 | +389 | — |
| Kolli Sreelakshmi | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 6,843 | +180 | — |
| Kurdikar Devdatt | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 2,990 | +180 | — |
| Shapiro Louis | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,703 | +159 | — |
| Noor Jehanzeb | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 1,857 | +1,857 | — |
| Noor Jehanzeb | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 1,857 | +1,857 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
8,788,234 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,180,764 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.8% 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