Earnings Revisions

Methodology

Two measures. Two questions get asked about analyst revisions, and they don't always agree: how many analysts are changing their minds, and how much the number is moving. The Net Revision Ratio answers the first. For each stock's current-fiscal-year (FY1) consensus EPS estimate, it's (upward revisions − downward revisions) ÷ total revisions over the trailing 30 days, a breadth measure running from −1 (every revision was down) to +1 (every revision was up). The Estimate Drift answers the second: the trailing-30-day percent change in the consensus FY1 EPS estimate. A stock or sector can have wide breadth with almost no drift (a dozen analysts each nudging their number a penny the same way), or the reverse: one or two analysts making a large call that moves the average without most of the Street weighing in. Sector and market figures are the equal-weighted mean across each group's constituents, not cap-weighted, so a $50B mid-cap's revisions count the same as a Magnificent Seven name's.

The universe is the S&P 500, with sector classification from Sector Beeswarm. Leaderboards exclude stocks with fewer than 3 covering analysts, since a one- or two-analyst estimate can swing double digits on a single revision with no breadth behind it.

Over time. The chart isn't backfilled. Alpha Vantage's estimates endpoint returns only the current trailing-window figures, not past snapshots, so there's no way to reconstruct the Net Revision Ratio from a year or five years ago. This page takes its own weekly snapshot and adds it to the line, which gets more useful as points accumulate. An early, short line is a start, not a full cycle.

Recomputed weekly (Saturday) across all ~500 constituents, not daily. Trailing-30-day revision counts and drift don't move enough day to day to justify more frequent runs.