Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$91.15
▲ $2.80 (+3.2%)
Market data updated: 09/30 06:32 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$88.37 - $91.66
52-Week Range
$70.70 - $114.74
Beta
—
Next Earnings
23.11.2026
Support
$83.32
Resistance
$110.89
ZM is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+5.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/28 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: $100.99 vs. price $91.15 (+10.8%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
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
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
42
Value
67
Momentum
16
Risk
48
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
76
Institutional
0
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.
Recent media coverage of Zoom Communications, Inc. has focused on its stock valuation and investor sentiment, with headlines noting a significant market markdown of its shares, raising questions about whether the decline reflects a misjudgment or a final assessment of its long-term prospects. Additionally, the company announced the appointment of Jeff Epstein, a former Oracle CFO, to its board while Jonathan Chadwick, a long-serving director, is set to retire. The broader market context, including economic concerns and AI-related shifts, also indirectly influences investor perceptions of Zoom.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Zoom Communications, Inc.. News trend score: 62. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
20
Fundamentals
76
Technical
16
Valuation
67
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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.
Price (3M)
-2%
Market Narrative
32
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
-4
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ZM suggests a dominant state of Panic Selling, driven by negative momentum and elevated volatility despite muted volume. The narrative gap (-13) further implies a disconnect between market pricing and fundamentals, consistent with cautious liquidation. Key open questions involve whether volatility stabilizes or if sentiment deteriorates further. The absence of FOMO or herding reinforces a defensive stance, though anchoring near support may delay aggressive selling. The data does not indicate euphoria or overconfidence, reinforcing a neutral-to-bearish tone.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:43 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
""The video platform that defined an era now trades at a fraction of the market's price, forcing investors to decide if the markdown is a miscalculation or a final verdict""
""Zoom announced today the appointment of Jeff Epstein to its Board of Directors, effective immediately""
📈 19D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Bagehot's documented principles, the model estimates ZM has strong liquidity (score 100) and, according to Mackay, shows no crowd mania (score 97), suggesting a defensively solid footing. Based on Graham's documented principles, the model estimates the stock falls short of his margin‑of‑safety tests (score 54) and even the looser Enterprising Investor bar (score 43), indicating valuation concerns. Based on Lynch’s documented principles, the model estimates ZM is a growth candidate whose price hasn’t yet caught up (score 75), while Marks sees reasonably priced risk (score 78) but Veblen and Fisher flag mixed signals about sustainable earnings quality (scores 61 and 37). Based on Livermore’s documented principles, the model estimates a negative trend (score 26) and, per Housel, the volatility could shake patient holders (score 30). Together, these divergent scores show that liquidity‑ and sentiment‑focused methods are optimistic, whereas intrinsic‑value, earnings‑quality, and trend‑following approaches are far more cautious.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 94
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)
🟢 91
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 75
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 74
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)
🟢 65
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 61
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 55
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 53
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 51
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 43
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
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 37
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 33
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 24
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 13
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 288 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 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
77.0%
Operating Margin
23.1%
Net Margin
39.0%
EBITDA Margin
25.8%
ROE
19.4%
ROA
15.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.32
Cash
$1.27B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
4.33
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$91.15
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$100.99
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+10.8%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
3.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.5% | $1.99B | $1.83B |
| 2 | 3.2% | $2.06B | $1.73B |
| 3 | 3.0% | $2.12B | $1.63B |
| 4 | 2.7% | $2.18B | $1.54B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $2.23B | $1.45B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.92B
Terminal Value
$35.16B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$22.85B
Enterprise Value
$31.04B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$31.04B
*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
$31.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$30.46
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 6 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 30.9.2026
Yahoo · 29.9.2026
Yahoo · 29.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 22.9.2026
StockStory · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Trefis · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Motley Fool · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) 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.
ZM 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, ZM's estimated fair value is $100.99, which is 10.8% above the current price of $91.15. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ZM'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: $100.99 vs. price $91.15 (+10.8%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 92.5%; Net income growth: 88.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: 0.31 (3y annualized return 8.0% / max drawdown 25.9%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ZM.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 13 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 149,265 | -206 | $96.37 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 149,471 | -2,384 | $95.76 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 206 | -206 | $96.37 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 2,384 | -2,384 | $95.76 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 155,434 | +7,031 | — |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.9.2026 | 151,855 | -3,579 | $96.44 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 0 | -4,224 | — |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.9.2026 | 3,579 | -3,579 | $96.44 |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 4,224 | -4,224 | — |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 2,807 | -2,807 | — |
| Sankarlingam Velchamy | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 7,031 | +7,031 | — |
| Subotovsky Santiago | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 125,268 | -1,792 | $96.48 |
| Subotovsky Santiago | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 124,423 | -845 | $96.95 |
| Subotovsky Santiago | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 845 | -845 | $96.95 |
| Subotovsky Santiago | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 1,792 | -1,792 | $96.48 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Conversion of Derivative Security | 2.9.2026 | 20,667,885 | -12,100 | — |
| Yuan Eric S. | Conversion of Derivative Security | 2.9.2026 | 35,098 | +12,100 | — |
| Yuan Eric S. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 22,998 | -1,771 | $96.53 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 24,769 | -10,329 | $95.70 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,771 | -1,771 | $96.53 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Conversion of Derivative Security | 2.9.2026 | 12,100 | +12,100 | — |
| Yuan Eric S. | Conversion of Derivative Security | 2.9.2026 | 12,100 | -12,100 | — |
| Yuan Eric S. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 10,329 | -10,329 | $95.70 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 24,371 | -10,727 | $95.27 |
| Yuan Eric S. | Conversion of Derivative Security | 1.9.2026 | 20,679,985 | -12,100 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
7,058,003 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 7,131,426 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 29.5% 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