Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
XOM

XOM Research brief

ExxonMobil

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$187.25(+2.16%)

Sagehood’s view on XOM

ExxonMobil · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

66Bullish50 is balancedScore unchanged since 2026-10-29 at 66; view unchanged at Bullish. Compare the two recordsConfidence 60 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

In Sagehood30 · book 2026-10-30In the current Top-7 book

Dated research brief

WhyExxonMobil's multi-window uptrend and Energy leadership support a constructive view, because the 90-day channel slope is +105.1%/yr and price sits 22.1% above 200-day average. The unresolved risk is an extended advance, with 5-year position sigma at 1.94 and 14-week RSI at 71.6.
Main riskThe strongest case against the constructive view is that the advance is already stretched. The 5-year position sigma of 1.94 and a 14-week RSI of 71.6 mark an extended move, and the 6 large-move days in the past year show the tape can gap sharply.
Break conditionTiming evidence: a daily close below $178.38 would break the uptrend read and the golden cross that is 309 days old.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

No model fair value for this run

Cash-flow model unavailable: the recorded cash, total debt, net debt are missing or invalid. Other valuation methods retain their own checks.

Score details & research limitations11 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$187.25 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day+2.16%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage8 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 2 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 8 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run66 on 2026-10-29 → 66 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Not in this run: Filing cited in the evidence, Company profile date, Peer set and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

11 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $187.25

+37.0% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

XOM adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. XOM adjusted close. Continuous series. $187.25 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-07-23 to 2026-10-30 · 37 publications

Each point is a verified published score. The line breaks where the research method changed (4 methods, numbered in the order they were first used), so scores are not joined across methods. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3066Bullish60Method 4
2026-10-2966Bullish60Method 4
2026-10-2864Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2762Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2666Bullish55Method 4
2026-10-2362Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-2262Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2160Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-1666Bullish55Method 4
2026-10-0951Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-0760Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-0259Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-0161Neutral57Method 4
2026-09-3055Neutral50Method 4
2026-09-2955Neutral50Method 4
2026-09-2855Neutral50Method 4
2026-09-2555Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective51Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-2352Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-1853Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective50Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective58Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-0446Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective58Neutral75Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective49Neutral61Method 3
2026-08-2849Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective50Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective51Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective52Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective50Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-1455Neutral60Method 2
2026-08-1355Neutral60Method 1
2026-08-0756Neutral60Method 1
2026-08-0656Neutral60Method 1
2026-08-0456Neutral60Method 1
2026-07-3156Neutral70Method 1
2026-07-2355Neutral54Method 1

Specialists

8 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

2 unavailable

XOM research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Neutral

ExxonMobil's financial coverage is missing with 0 annual and 0 quarterly periods and 0 revenue, margin or cash-flow figures available, so the fundamental read is neutral pending data.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: ExxonMobil's financial coverage status is missing with 0 annual and 0 quarterly periods, and 0 revenue, margin, cash-flow and balance-sheet figures are available in this run.

Why it matters now

With 0 revenue, margin or cash-flow observations available, the business trajectory cannot be assessed, so the read stays neutral rather than directional.

What could change the view

Countercase: The read would be wrong if ExxonMobil's financials are simply not captured in this run rather than genuinely unavailable, which would make the neutral stance an artifact of missing data. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the neutral stance.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
50
Evidence confidence
24
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
3.12
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.07
Weighted contribution
3.61
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
24
Weight in the score
0.07
Weighted contribution
3.61

Risk specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
6.43

Sector specialist

Bullish

Score
68
Evidence confidence
68
Weight in the score
0.16
Weighted contribution
10.69

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
30
Weight in the score
0.02
Weighted contribution
1.04

News specialist

Neutral

Score
62
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.14
Weighted contribution
8.67

Price-trend specialist

Bullish

Score
72
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.28
Weighted contribution
19.97

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
30
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
5.55

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
5.55

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

XOM: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

66

Bullish50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Price-trend specialist

Bullish

Specialist score 72Evidence confidence 60
What the specialist sees

Close $187.25 is 22.1% above 200-day average and 11.6% above 50-day average, with the 5-year channel slope +16.7%/yr (fit R² 0.79), 2-year +32.6%/yr, 1-year +47.1%/yr and 90-day +105.1%/yr; 14-day ADX (trend strength) is 31.1, positive directional indicator 28.8 versus negative directional indicator 11.1, and 126-session relative-strength percentile within the universe 84.

Why it matters

If all four channel windows keep rising while price holds above 200-day average, the advance is an impulse continuation rather than a blow-off, though the extended 5-year trend-channel position leaves room for a pullback toward the $169.25 support.

What argues against it

The 5-year trend-channel position of 1.94 standard deviations and 2-year of 1.59 mark an extended advance, and rsi14W 71.6 is above the level that often precedes a pause.

This specialist’s break condition: Timing evidence: a daily close below $178.38 would break the uptrend read and the golden cross that is 309 days old.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 61.50. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +4.50. 66 on 2026-10-29 → 66 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Price-trend specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Sector specialist

    Energy leads: XLE beats SPY by 19.8 percentage points over 63 days and all 8 peers sit above their 50-day average. XOM is a leader in-sector, ahead of Energy by 1.7 percentage points over 63 days, 2.6 percentage points over 21 days and 3.7 percentage points over 126 days, with peer rank 2 of 8.

  3. News specialist

    ExxonMobil's Q3 earnings beat item carried a tone of 2 with a one-day return relative to SPY of 3.93, and material-news net tone was 0.31 with good-news days followed by outperformance of 6 against bad-news days followed by underperformance of 1.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

Timing evidence: a daily close below $178.38 would break the uptrend read and the golden cross that is 309 days old.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

XOM: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Cash-flow model unavailable

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $187.25 (recorded)

Cash-flow model unavailable: the recorded cash, total debt, net debt are missing or invalid. Other valuation methods retain their own checks.

Multiples against the peer group

Energy · 7 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)Not computed in this research

    Peer median 15.20× · middle half 12.23× to 21.79×

  • Price to salesNot computed in this research

    Peer median 2.24× · middle half 1.92× to 3.25×

  • Price to bookNot computed in this research

    Peer median 2.39× · middle half 1.46× to 2.59×

  • Free cash flow yieldNot computed in this research

    Peer median 5.78% · middle half 5.43% to 9.18%

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: Filed financials were unavailable for this name on this session; 7 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; stock-based compensation is not among this research’s inputs; tax expense is not among this research’s inputs; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple; debt coverage was incomplete; the measured beta of -0.06 was below the floor used for the cost of equity, so the floor was applied instead.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

ExxonMobil (XOM) research | Sagehood