MDLNNMSneutralOPERATING CO.judged on execution & valuation
Medline Inc. ·
$34.59
▲+0.78 (+2.31%)
Aug 11, 2026 · 12:15 PM ET
Mkt cap$46.27B
P/E · fwd43.0 · 21.4
Div yieldNone
Beta 1y0.55
Volume3.40M0.34× avg
52-wk range -32.0%3351
The five reads
At a glance the decision-relevant reads, first
GLOBAL TAPE
Overseas lean0.00%
FrankfurtL100.00%⏱
ZurichMDLN0.00%⏱
Track record · free & ungated
We grade our price-band calls in public
Each forward price band is logged the day it's set and scored when it resolves — misses included. 5 bands have resolved so far — not yet enough for a hit-rate that would mean anything, so none is shown. This builds in the open, not behind the paywall.
10
bands logged
5
resolved so far
Building
status
The calibration ledger stays free, always — a track record can't sit behind a paywall.
Price action
Price & quote
Live quote refreshed every 15 minutes against the full daily snapshot.
The readHolding bidfact
Where the price sits inside today's range and its 52-week range, plus how it's performed over time. This is the raw quote — the same number everywhere, just faster.
◇ Contracting triangle
Drag or arrow-key the chart for daily OHLCV · 126 sessions through Aug 10, 2026 · prev close $33.81 (dashed) · live $34.59 hollow — not yet a settled bar
Open●
$33.66
Prev close●
$33.81
Volume●
3.40M
avg 9.92M
Rel. volume◐
0.34×
below normal
Market cap●
$46.27B
Shares out●
845.61M
float 356.91M
Day range
$33.10$34.59
52-week range ◐
$32.82$50.88
-32.0% from high+5.4% above low
The QTick signal
QTick proprietary signal
A transparent point tally — bull evidence minus bear evidence — read over ~30 days. Faster factors time the swing; slower ones (quality, 13F, forensics) weigh in as longer-horizon context. A model-based prior, not advice.
~30-day swing read · graded vs S&Puncalibrated prior · track record buildingstrength is the tally magnitude, not a probability
Price-factor lean — not shown at this market cap (these factors carry no validated edge above small-cap).
Where this is validated: survivorship-free factor study (micro/small caps only), |t|>3.2. Cohort-relative ranking, not a price forecast or buy/sell advice. Calibration tracked live.
-1
net · balanced
1 bull / 3 bear factors
Factor breakdown 8 factors · signed points sum to net -1●
Analyst moves90d-1 pts
7 price-target cut(s) in 90d
Earnings4 quarters+2 pts
latest EPS beat by 12%
Insider flow120d-1 pts
net insider selling ($104,650,868 across 8 sell(s)) in 120d
Estimate revisionsWeeks—
Sentiment1–30d-1 pts
7d sentiment depressed (22/100)
Longer-horizon context weighs the read · not a 30-day timing call
Institutional (13F)Latest 13F—
1 institutional holder(s) added/opened last quarter (demoted — validated negative IC, not scored (QUANT_SIGNAL.md))
Quality / valueTTM—
Filing forensicsLatest FY—
filing forensics — an unquantified legal/regulatory contingency the company says it cannot estimate (demoted — settled NULL/wrong-signed, not scored (QTICK_FORMULA_AUDIT_2026_07.md))
Risk flagsDaily—
Net tally
-1
2 bull − 3 bear
Factors agreeing
1↑ 3↓
of 9 tracked
Read strength
balanced
30d horizon
Strongest factor
Earnings
+2 pts
Model
QTick Engine
MDLN track record
Building
5 of 10 resolved
Forensic flags filing red flags · backtested edge where shown●
Revenue-timing languagerevenue-recognition timing language worth watching
Cannot-estimate contingencyan unquantified legal/regulatory contingency the company says it cannot estimate
Territory — competitor / supplier graph ●
ISRGPeer+1.7%
BDXPeer+0.5%
ALCPeer+1.9%
RMDPeer+0.8%
RSMDFPeer0.0%
Where the reads agree
Cross-category read
A decorrelated view across the categories already scored elsewhere on this page — where they agree, where they conflict, and how lopsided the split is. Not a new signal, a different angle on ones that already exist.
Category reads n=4 categories voting
Streetleans down
Eventleans up
Positioningleans down
Trendleans down
1 lean up, 3 lean down — modal read: bear.
Where they conflict
Event leans up while Trend leans down.
Event leans up while Street leans down.
Event leans up while Positioning leans down.
1 of 4 weighted reads lean the other way — minority weight share 32%.
Named patterns
Tape is deteriorating with risk flags lit.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Cheap, but low-quality and credit-stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
High quality, solvent and trending.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Trend, crowded short positioning and option fuel.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Tape turning up while fundamentals/credit are still stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Trend that is heavily rate/macro-driven.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
↳ In detail
A pattern, not a validated signal
This regroups categories the page already scores elsewhere into one cross-category view — it does not add a new tally. Descriptive only — a decorrelated read of where the evidence agrees and conflicts, not a forecast and not advice. Patterns are condition lists, not outcome predictions, and are not yet validated to the proof bar.
-1 net
balanced
1 bull / 3 bear factors
Red-Flag X-Ray
Accounting quality · red-flag scan
One integrity score (0–100) from a set of accounting checks that look for red flags. Higher is safer — and we show the checks it passed, not just the ones it failed.
How we test · 7 forensic testsA clear result ships as openly as a flag — and the tests that don't fire are published in full. No survivorship bias.
Share dilution / SBC creepFires when shares outstanding rise materially or stock-based comp outpaces buybacks.
Distress (Altman-Z, negative equity)Fires on balance-sheet fragility. For banks we substitute regulatory capital (CET1).
Margin trajectoryFires on multi-quarter gross / operating margin erosion.
Going-concern languageNLP scan of filings for material-doubt or going-concern wording.
Filing timelinessFires on late / NT (non-timely) filings and restatements.
Insider selling into strengthFires on discretionary insider sells during price strength; 10b5-1 plans down-weighted.
Analyst-downgrade momentumFires on clusters of net downgrades and target cuts.
Odds & pullback risk
Setup & odds
Which way the next move is more likely to go — and how overstretched the price looks right now.
The read—where it sitsuncalibrated prior · not a forecast
How the likely upside compares with the downside, and how stretched the price is — odds, not timing.
Upside vs downside · 12m ◐
Upside/downside split not available
Expected move · 1wk◐±—
Upside target◐$34.91 +0.9% · level, not a call
Invalidation / stop◐$33.12 -4.2% · level, not a call
Reward : risk◐0.2 : 1
BullClose above $35 opens continuation.
BaseChop between stop and target into the next catalyst.
BearA break of $33 invalidates the setup.
Pullback risk · experimental ◐
LowElevatedHigh
Historically, large names in this tape state saw a ≥10% pullback within 63 trading days in 86% of cases (n=399).
1.36×the segment norm — 86% saw a ≥10% pullback within 63dn=399 · observational
Resolved up vs down · 63d◐67% up · 33% down same historical group as the pullback read · 399 cases · flat outcomes count on neither side — a historical rate, not a call
Conditioned on◐falling knife · high vol · neg momentum the past setups matched against this one
1.36× the large unconditional rate
tape state: falling knife
price 2.3σ from its 20-day mean
↳ In detail
How to read the odds
This is a historical rate, and an experimental one: across 25 years, stocks in the same state — same segment, same price phase, same volatility, same momentum — pulled back this often. The record is built from today's list of companies, so names that delisted along the way are missing and each stock's current segment is projected backward; the rates lean toward survivors until that rebuild lands. Compare the multiple against the segment rather than the bare percentage — recent years run higher than the full 25-year record. None of it predicts timing.
The structure under the price ●
Support band●$31.76 – $33.64 -2.7% from spot · level, not a call
s1●$33.12 basis
pivot low●$32.82 basis
low 52w●$32.82 basis
~68%of bands like this held 21 days after a touch — about the same as any comparable support level. Structure, not a prediction.n=40,800 · observational
Bottom confirmation●1 of 6 signs in find-bottom score 0/100 — pinned to 0 until the checklist clears
Capitulation flush, then quiet●in
Selling volume dried up●not yet
A higher low printed●not yet
Back above the 20-day line●not yet
Momentum diverging up●not yet
Heaviest volume on an up day●not yet
85%of confirmed bottoming reads still saw a ≥10% drawdown inside the next quarter (25-year study) — confirmation marks a turn forming, not safety.n=1,203 · observational
Trend & technical structure
Trend & technicals
The price chart's vital signs, in plain English. Expand any row for what it actually means for you.
The read—where it sitsmoving-average posture · fact
Moving averages describe the direction; RSI and the bands describe how stretched the move is. Neither predicts the next one.
Average prices (the trend)
Price vs 200-day●—
Momentum, bands & levels
↳ In detail
The simple version
When price sits aboveits averages with momentum rising, the trend is healthy. When RSI is near the extremes or the price looks "stretched," the move is overdone and often takes a breather. Think of these as a weather report — conditions, not instructions.
Pattern outcomes · derived analysis
Do these patterns even work?
Derived · what patterns actually did
Every charting site detects the pattern. We publish what happened next — the forward win-rate and sample size at each horizon, including the famous patterns that historically meant nothing.
The readForward win-rates, with sample sizewhere it sits
How often each chart pattern was actually followed by a gain, and how many past cases that's based on — including famous ones that didn't work.
Each bar is the win-rate — how often the price was higher that many days after the pattern appeared. The line marks 50%, a coin flip: green beats it, red is worse than chance. Every bar is a platform-wide cohort base rateacross every stock that has shown this pattern (cohort record, not this ticker's own history alone).
Pattern10-day21-day63-day
SidewaysBelow a coin flip
forward win-rate47.5%n=1,436,439
forward win-rate49.0%n=674,534
forward win-rate50.8%n=214,238
slope +0.04 over 40 bars
Bullish haramiBelow a coin flip
forward win-rate48.9%n=127,669
forward win-rate48.3%n=60,037
forward win-rate49.2%n=19,169
small body inside prior bearish
Snapshot as of 2026-08-11
↳ In detail
Why we show you the losers
Famous reversal signals like a bullish engulfing have historically closed higher less than half the time at short horizons — below a coin flip. We publish the win-rate and the sample size on every cohort, so a 42-case base rate never masquerades as an 8,500-case one. Objective base rates, not forecasts.
Momentum & performance
Momentum / performance
Trailing returns and relative strength versus the benchmark.
The readLaggardwhere it sitsRS percentile vs market
How the stock has returned, and whether it's beating the market. A strong run shows recent leadership — leadership reverses without warning.
Trailing returns
1-month◐-16.7%
3-month◐-13.9%
6-month◐-28.6%
Year-to-date◐-16.8%
1-year◐—
12-1 momentum◐—
Relative strength vs S&P 500
25.9
RS-rank percentile vs market
laggingleading
Relative strength line (β-adj)◐-19.52
↳ In detail
What relative strength tells you
A rank of 25.9 means MDLN has outpaced 25.9% of the market over the past year. That is what it has done, not a promise about what comes next — leadership can reverse without warning.
Risk profile
Risk
Volatility and sensitivity, regressed against SPY from adjusted bars — then the landmine check: what could actually go wrong here.
The readLow drawdown riskwhere it sitsvs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational
Beta is how much it moves with the market; volatility and the worst drop show how rough the ride has been. Historical context, not a position-size rule.
6.5%6-month large-drawdown risk vs 9.3% for its segment
Low drawdown riskNames like this hit a large drawdown within 6 months at 0.7× the rate of the ADV-Q5 mega segment — observational, never a sell.
Beta · 1-year◐
0.55
less sensitive
Beta · 3-year◐
0.55
Realized vol · 30d◐
64.5%
annualized
Max drawdown · 1y●
-33.6%
The drawdown read · 6-month, segment-graded
Where it sits0.7×
LowHigh
vs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational
6.5%6-month large-drawdown risk, vs 9.3% for its segment
Max drawdown, trailing year●-0.34 driver
Distance from 52-week high●-0.34 driver
Parkinson range volatility●0.45 driver
Log price (level)●3.52 driver
Observational 6-month large-drawdown risk ranking — not a forecast, not alpha. Historical distress rate for this ADV-Q5 mega segment: 9.3%. This name reads 0.7× that base rate.
Tape state & tail · nightly, adjusted bars
Falling knife70/100
SettledKnifing
State: falling_knife — Still breaking lower without consolidation — a fresh swing-low printed and no basing pattern has formed yet.
Selling pressure●63 elevated
Cannot-estimate contingency●flagged
↳ In detail
Reading risk
A beta of 0.55 means that, historically, a 1% move in the S&P has come with a ~0.55% move here. Realized vol ran 65% and the largest drawdown observed in the trailing year was 34% — both are what happened, not a bound on what can. The drawdown band above is observational — a risk sort against names of the same segment, blind to balance-sheet failures that never showed in the price.
Failure modes
Coverage
Data not available — failure modes are routed per company type, and only the bank and crypto-treasury rulebooks are validated so far (this name routes as growth)
Macro sensitivity · derived analysis
How rates push this name
Derived · rates & regime
The 10-year yield is public. Its measured pull on this specific stock — and how it trades around the macro calendar — is the derived layer.
The readMDLN reacts ~1.1× as strongly as the market to Jobs (Nonfarm Payrolls).where it sitshow it moved when rates moved · extremes trimmed
How much this stock actually moves when interest rates move, and how it behaves around big economic releases.
Sensitivity to 10Y yield ●
Per +1% in the 10Y yield-8.5%
−120+12
Rates are a MDLN reacts ~1.1× as strongly as the market to Jobs (Nonfarm Payrolls). for this name
Observations●159 rolling window
Fit · r²●n/a
Measured across 159 daily moves against the 10-year Treasury yield (FRED DGS10). Where the company-level link is weak or the sample is short, we fall back to the sector average rather than print a number we don't trust.
Behaviour around the macro calendar ●
CPI · vs a typical dayn=70.7×
FOMC · vs a typical dayn=80.8×
NFP · vs a typical dayn=81.1×
PCE · vs a typical dayn=80.9×
Latest print · 10-Year Treasury Yield (2026-08-07) read as a neutral for this name. 10-Year Treasury Yield moved cooler than trend, but this name shows no clear, measured reaction to it.
× = how much more this stock moves on each release day vs a normal day. Amber = outsized (≥1.4×). Context, not a directional call.
Volatility regime ◔
The volatility engine runs on market-wide risk channels, not on individual names, so there is no 1-year volatility percentile for this symbol. The realized-volatility and drawdown reads in the risk section are the per-name measures.
Valuation
Valuation
Is the stock cheap or expensive? Each multiple is graded and explained in plain English.
The readLeans expensivewhere it sitsagainst its own 5-year range where we have it · standard bands otherwise
Price against earnings, sales, book value and cash flow. We mark the measures that don't apply rather than fake them.
What you pay for earnings
P/E (trailing)●Price ÷ last 12 months of profit; graded vs own 5y history when covered43.0×Rich
Forward P/E●Price ÷ next year's expected profit21.4×Fair
PEG ratio◐Valuation set against expected growth — lower can look cheaper, but one cutoff is not a verdictn/an/a
Earnings yield◔Profit as a % of price, like a bond yield2.33%Rich
Earnings yield − risk-free●Earnings yield minus the government-bond yield at the same date-1.46%Spread
Dividend yield●Annual indicated cash dividend as a % of price0.00%Income
What you pay for the business
Price / Sales●Price ÷ annual revenue; graded vs own 5y history when covered1.6×Cheap
Price / Book◔Price ÷ net assets on the books4.31×Fair
EV / EBITDA◔Whole-company value ÷ operating cash earnings18.6×Fair
EV / FCF◔Whole-company value ÷ positive free cash flow43.9×Rich
FCF yield◔Free cash flow as a % of market value2.80%Rich
P/E vs own 5y●Five-year median not on filen/aRich
P/S vs own 5y●Five-year median not on filen/aCheap
Peers today territory performance, for valuation context
ISRGPeer+1.7%
BDXPeer+0.5%
ALCPeer+1.9%
RMDPeer+0.8%
RSMDFPeer0.0%
Fundamentals & quality
Fundamentals / quality
How good is the underlying business? Scale, profitability and balance-sheet strength, graded.
The readPartial fundamentals readwhere it sitsreturn on capital vs its estimated cost of funding
Scale, profitability and balance sheet, with industrial return on capital compared directly with its estimated funding cost.
Scale & growth
Revenue · TTM◔Total sales over the last 12 months—Scale
EPS · TTM◔Profit earned per share$0.74Profit
Net margin◔Cents of profit kept per $1 of sales4.1%Weak
Revenue growth◔Sales vs a year ago—n/a
EPS growth◔Profit-per-share vs a year ago-101.5%Weak
Margin trajectory◔Are profit margins widening or shrinking?n/an/a
Returns & balance sheet
ROE◔Profit generated on shareholders' equity10.8%OK
ROIC●After-tax operating profit earned on the capital the business usesn/an/a
WACC●Estimated blended cost of debt and equityn/an/a
ROIC − WACC●Return on capital above or below its funding costn/an/a
Incremental ROIC · ~3y●What the last three years of new investment has actually earnedn/an/a
Gross / Op margin◔Profitability before & after operating costs26% / 8%Weak
Free cash flow◔Cash left after running & investing$1.30BStrong
Cash self-funding◔Self-funding on trailing free cash flow, or months of cash left at the current burnn/an/a
Debt / Equity◔Gross borrowings vs equity — negative book equity is not gradeable1.18OK
Current ratio◔Can it cover near-term bills? Over 1.5 is healthy4.29Strong
Total assets · YoY◔Balance-sheet growth — a fact, not a signal · grew faster than 58% of the measured cross-section · as of 2026-08-09+7.0%Fact
Last filed 2026-06-22
Inventory ledger
The stockroom
Data not available.
Segments & geography
Where the revenue lives
Data not available.
Credit & safety · derived analysis
Distance from insolvency
Derived · distance from default
Not the debt total — how far this company's asset value could fall before its debts get hard to cover, and how that distance ranks against its peers.
The readSolventwhere it sitspercentile vs solvency universe
How far the company sits from real financial distress, plus how it ranks against peers — more than a debt total tells you.
99.88%12-month survival read
None of 2,600 historical observations in this bucket went bankrupt within 12 months — the served 0.12% is a conservative statistical floor, never a claimed zero.
measured against past bankruptcies and delistings · tested on later years (AUC 0.90) · a historical rate, not a credit rating
4.49
σ to default
0.12%model-implied probability of default ●
Filing-forensics flags
1/4
SafeGreyDistress
Model-implied, not a credit rating.It estimates how far the company's assets would have to fall before it couldn't cover its debts, using a standard model (Merton). Higher is safer. (risk-free rate n/a, one-year horizon, asset volatility from —)
Structural snapshot as of 2026-08-11
Distance-to-default band ●
distress · 0cautionsafe8σ+
Debt-service capacity
Interest coverage●n/a operating income / absolute interest expense
Long-term debt / assets●n/a as filed; distinct from Merton D/V
↳ In detail
How to read these two ratios
The credit engine uses the same stored thresholds shown here: coverage at or below 1× cannot cover interest, while 8× or more is its comfortable band; long-term debt at 10% of assets or less is its light band, while 60% or more is its heavy band. Missing XBRL tags stay n/a.
Altman solvency ●
Altman Z-Score●3.2 Safe
↳ In detail
Why a percentile, not a number
The absolute Z-Score is shown whenever its filing inputs exist. The cross-sectional percentile is a separate field and stays n/a until a current universe rank is on file.
Forensic accounting ●
1Validated forensic-accounting flag fired. Individual flag details are not carried by this endpoint.
Dilution radar · derived analysis
Are your shares being diluted?
Derived · ownership erosion
Raw share count is everywhere. The consequence — how fast the count is growing and where that ranks against peers — is the read that matters.
The read—where it sitsdilution percentile vs peers
How fast the share count is changing versus peers, with stock compensation, issuance and repurchases shown separately when covered.
5-year share-count CAGR ●
The CAGR needs annual filings roughly five years apart that both carry a share count. This name's filing history on file does not span that window, so no rate is published — the buyback and stock-comp rows below are measured independently and still hold.
Most-dilutive percentile vs peers
LeastMedianMost
0percentile100
Peer percentile●0th below median
Stock comp / revenue◔0.3% latest fiscal year
Stock comp / OCF◔operating cash flown/a not covered
Gross buyback yield●+0.05% TTM repurchases / market value
Net buyback yield●n/a TTM repurchases minus issuance / market value
Indexing needs an unbroken run of annual share counts across the same five-year window the CAGR uses. Where a year is missing — or the reported counts switch share class mid-series — the chart is withheld rather than drawn across the gap.
Analyst & estimates
Analyst & estimates
Consensus, price targets, forward estimates, and the company's recent results versus consensus.
The read—where it sitswhere Wall Street sits · not QTick
Targets matter less than which way estimates are heading and how often the company beats them.
The consensus EPS level, the share of analysts raising, and the realised beat-rate all come from the same estimate capture, which does not cover this name. The rating, target band and street moves above are from a separate source and are current.
EPS surprise history ●
No reported-vs-estimate pairs on file for this name
Recent rating changes ●
Street moves · last 90 days ◔
↓target $46RBC Capitalfirm credibility 44/10006 Aug
↓target $47Truist Securitiesfirm credibility 44/10006 Aug
↓target $39Evercore ISI Groupfirm credibility 45/10006 Aug
↓target $45Stifelfirm credibility 43/10006 Aug
Earnings bias · derived analysis
How this name behaves into the print
Earnings habit
The street's consensus-surprise habit — whether estimates run conservative or aggressive against what the company reports, not management's own guidance — the beat streak graded against names with the same profile, and what the tape does on good news.
The readSerial beaterwhere it sitsvalidated base rates · graded out-of-time
Whether the street sandbags this name, how often a beat streak like this persists (with its sample size), and what the tape does with good news.
62%of names with this beat profile beat againn=126,782 · observational
Consensus habit · trailing 8 quarters
Consensus-surprise habit●not management guidanceinsufficient surprise history n=3
insufficient history (n=3 < 4)
Trailing beat rate●100% n=3
62%of names that had this beat profile went on to beat again (cohort record, not this stock alone)n=126,782 · observational
insufficient history for a bucket — pooled base rate
Post-earnings tape●— no measured announcement reactions on file yet
Earnings-day move · typical●— needs ≥8 measured prints
Implied vs realized move●— insufficient options history
↳ In detail
How to read the habit
This is a historical rate: among companies with the same recent beat record, that share beat again. It was checked on later periods than the ones it learned from, and against the plain long-run average. It describes the group, not this specific report.
Ownership & positioning
Ownership
Who holds it, how options lean, and the most recent insider, congressional and 13F transactions.
The readFunds addingwhere it sitspositioning band · not a vote
Who owns it and what insiders and big funds are doing. Steady buying reads positive; heavy selling reads cautious.
Holders
Institutional●108.3%
Insider●0.3%
Institutional flow●Funds adding
Fund concentration●—
Activist stake●None on file
Insider & short
Insider 90d net●—
10b5-1 vs discretionary◔scheduledMostly programmatic
Short interest · %float◔7.6%
Short interest · 30d Δ◔—
Options positioning
Put/call · OI●—
Put/call · volume●—
Implied move●next exp.±8.5%
IV skew (25Δ)●+1.9% put-skewed
↳ In detail
Reading the positioning
Institutions are still adding. The options market shows put-skewed IV — leaning defensive.
Recent transactions Form 4 + congressional●
FilerSourceActionValueDate
GIC Private Ltd10% ownerInsiderSell2100000011 Aug
Mozart Holdco, Inc.10% ownerInsiderSell007 Aug
Mozart Holdco, Inc.10% ownerInsiderSell007 Aug
Mozart Holdco, Inc.10% ownerInsiderSell007 Aug
GIC Private Ltd10% ownerInsiderSell960000007 Aug
13F filers · last quarter ●
Renaissance TechnologiesAdded+0.1M sh · $6M
Institutional flow · derived analysis
Conviction weighting, not a transaction list
Derived · who's actually buying
Insider buys are weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several bought at once, alongside how fast big funds moved in or out quarter to quarter.
The readContinuing holders addingwhere it sitscontinuing holders only — excludes new and exited funds
Insider buys, weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several buy at once — plus how fast big funds are moving in or out.
How strong the insider buying is ●
Clustered exec buys · 90d8.4 / 18.44
018.44
Louder than 52% of the insider buying filed that day, versus its own sectorIntensity index — explicitly not a probability
Distinct exec buyers
1/3
Buy clusters · last 90d
90d agotoday
Fund holders · quarter on quarter ●
+42new fundsexited−105
Net registered funds -63 this quarter
Continuing holders●Adding on balance funds that held through both quarters
↳ In detail
Reading the flow
Senior executives are buying — 1 of them, on the open market rather than on a pre-set schedule. Among funds that held the name through both quarters, more added than trimmed. Separately, the registered-holder count moved -63 quarter-over-quarter (42 new, 105 exited). The two count different populations, so they can point opposite ways. Conviction is intensity, not a forecast.
Options microstructure
Options microstructure
Computed over the stored full chain — where dealer hedging concentrates. Prices here are the chain snapshot's own, not the header quote.
The readHedging leans amplifyingwhere it sitswhere options exposure sits
The busiest option strikes are where hedging is concentrated, which can slow or sharpen a move nearby. Context — not support and resistance.
Open-interest by strike · gamma walls ◐
Puts OI (k)Calls OI (k)
0
60
0
0
55
0
0
50
0
0
45
0
0
40
0
0
35
0
0
30
0
WALL0
25
0WALL
chain spot $35.75 max pain $25 (-30.1%)
Dealer regime & expected move
Gamma exposure (GEX)
Negative
short
Max pain●$25.00 (-30.1%)
Put/call · OI●—
Call wall◐$25.00 resistance
Put wall◐$25.00 support
Expected move · session◐±3.7%
Expected move · week◐±8.3%
Gamma map · derived analysis
Where dealer hedging concentrates
Derived · dealer hedging · marquee
Open interest is free everywhere. What it does — whether dealer hedging dampens or amplifies a 1% move, and the strikes where that hedging concentrates — is the derived read.
The readHedging may sharpen moveswhere it sitswhere dealer hedging sits
Whether dealer hedging leans toward steadying the price or sharpening the next move, and the strikes where that hedging is concentrated.
Support / resistance rails ◐
call wall · resistance$45
spot$35.75
put wall · support$35
Dealer regime ◐
Short gamma — hedging can sharpen moves
Net dealer gamma◐−$499,387 per 1% move
ATM implied vol◐0.6%
Expected move · 1d◐±3.7%
Expected move · 1w◐±8.3%
OTM IV skew (25Δ)◐+1.9% put-skewed
↳ In detail
Reading the gamma map
Dealers are short gamma, so their hedging amplifies moves — a push through $45.00 or $35.00 tends to accelerate, not fade. Net gamma of −$499,387 is the dollar hedging effect per 1% move — the consequence a raw chain never tells you.
MDLN is +1.3% ahead of the peer average (+1.00%). Divergence from the group is where the stock-specific signal lives.
Supply map how the territory wires together●
competitorsupplier
Customer momentum
The customer chain
Data not available.
News & market context
The Story · news & social
Coverage published around the move, with the crowd's mood shown next to each.
The readCrowd mixedfactread as contrarian context
What moved the stock, plus how bullish the crowd is — which tends to be loudest right at the turning points.
Latest headlines 0▲ 0▼ of 48●
News
MDLN fell −4.03% since the last close, amid recent coverage: “Medline (NASDAQ:MDLN) Given New $45.00 Price Target at TD Cowen - MarketBeat” (MarketBeat).
Wells Fargo & Company Cuts Medline (NASDAQ:MDLN) Price Target to $34.00 - MarketBeat
NEWSMarketBeat·3h ago
Neutral
Medline $MDLN Shares Sold by PensionDanmark Pensionsforsikringsaktieselskab - MarketBeat
NEWSMarketBeat·7h ago
Neutral
Medline (NASDAQ:MDLN) Given New $45.00 Price Target at TD Cowen - MarketBeat
NEWSMarketBeat·Mon
Neutral
Medline $MDLN Shares Acquired by Cetera Investment Advisers - MarketBeat
NEWSMarketBeat·Sun
Headline tone ◐
22/100 · 7-day
-3 pts vs prior
Polarity of the headlines themselves, scored 0-100 with 50 neutral — a read on the coverage, not on the crowd.
Social sentiment ◐
No Reddit or StockTwits posts on file for this name in the last 7 days.
What this name did from here
Time machine
Each look-back point: the price then, the move to today, and what was going on — earnings, corporate events, news flow.
The readLook-backsfact
The price at each look-back point and the move to today, with what was happening at the time — the per-ticker face of the track record.
Look-backs · vs the $33.81 close of 2026-08-10
3 months ago●$39.52 -14.5% to today
6 months ago●$45.29 -25.4% to today
1 year ago●— history starts 2025-12-17; horizon predates our data
3 years ago●— history starts 2025-12-17; horizon predates our data
history starts 2025-12-17
↳ In detail
Why we show the rear-view mirror
Every number on this page gets graded by what happens next. The time machine is the same idea pointed backwards: the state of this name at each past date and the move that followed, for any symbol — not a curated highlight reel.
Risk case · derived analysis
The risk case
The case against
What can break: how hard this name has fallen before, a sensible position cap, whether it behaves like a lottery ticket, how much cash it has left, how it drifts after earnings, whether the dividend holds, and what changed in the filings — plus a crowding read when its three inputs agree.
The readCoverage incompletewhere it sitsan experimental model estimate · the history-based reads below are graded separately
The case against the stock: how hard it has fallen before, how much cash it has left, how it behaves after earnings, whether the dividend holds, what changed in the filings, and how crowded the trade is.
Avoid score · v2.1 isotonic model · experimental
The nightly batch has not scored this name yet — the model needs universe-wide ranking features that are not computed on demand.
Terminal fate · the cohort's ledger
Of 1242 large names tracked 2016-2026, 0.2% were delisted for cause within 24 months and 3.0% were acquired — historical frequencies for the cohort, not a forecast for this name.
Each row is what happened to every tracked name in this size cohort over that window — delisted for cause, acquired, or still listed — with the band around each rate. These are the cohort's historical frequencies, not probabilities for this name, and the acquisition arm is never an acquisition forecast.
No lottery signal — trailing-21d max daily return is within the normal range for its cohort (large).
Cash runway · non-burner
Positive free cash flow — burner runway risk does not apply. Non-burner: catastrophe rate 6.1% (n=297414).
Post-earnings drift
No measured first-day earnings reaction on file, so drift cannot be graded.
Dividend reliability
No dividend on file — trap / covered classification does not apply.
Filing restatements · trailing 2 years
Restatements on file●1 latest: 2025-12-31
Filings here were later materially revised. Historically, flagged quarters restated at 34.0% vs 5.5% unflagged (6.2x).
34.0%restatement rate for flagged quarters — reference sample count not stored
Unflagged rate●5.5% baseline for quarters without restatements
Relative rate●6.2× flagged vs unflagged quarters
↳ In detail
What a restatement means here
A restatement means a filing was later materially revised — not necessarily fraud, but a signal the original numbers were unreliable. Historically, quarters flagged here were restated at 34.0% vs 5.5% — 6.2× the unflagged rate.
Calibration scorecard
Auditable track record
Every rating we publish is fingerprinted, tracked, and resolved in public. Here's how we've actually done.
10
calls logged track record builds as calls resolve (5/8)