Will any ServiceNow insider (CEO, CFO, or Board member) make an additional discretionary open-market share purchase by September 30, 2026?

Two offsetting effects update the prior 0.39. Negative: 47 days elapsed since the CEO's Feb 27 purchase with zero additional insider activity. The resolution window has compressed from 7 months to ~5 months (~110 open trading days across ~2 clean open-window periods). Revealed preference has strengthened — even during the open window after the baseline buy, no other insider acted. Positive: the ~14% after-hours selloff on Q1 print creates a potential second sub-$100 entry opportunity that mirrors McDermott's February setup. The CEO has both demonstrated willingness and the non-10b5-1 infrastructure to re-execute quickly once the Q1 blackout lifts (~April 25). Additionally, DOJ silence on the call combined with strong federal-segment results (10 Public Sector deals >$1M) weakens the compliance-friction thesis that partly constrained the prior estimate. Net: slight drift lower — the no-buy-during-the-first-window signal outweighs the fresh entry-point opportunity.

I weight the post-earnings selloff more heavily than a pure revealed-preference read would suggest. The stock's 14% drop on a beat-and-raise quarter validates the baseline EXPECTATIONS_PRICED: MODEST finding and, mechanically, resets forward implied CAGR to ~12-17% — below the 19% cc organic growth actually delivered. This is precisely the asymmetry that drove McDermott's February purchase: quality business, depressed price, absence of DOJ materialization. If the after-hours weakness persists into the Q2 open window, McDermott repeating is materially more plausible than at baseline because (a) he now has demonstrated willingness, (b) the setup is structurally similar to February, and (c) the CSO Gidwani addition creates a new potential buyer (new officers sometimes signal alignment via initial open-market purchases). The resolution criterion is broad — ANY insider, ANY discretionary purchase. With ~110 open trading days and a compelling entry-point setup, the 0.39 prior slightly underweights the catalytic potential of the selloff. Slight uptick.

The revealed-preference signal has strengthened in a way I find hard to ignore. At baseline, the CEO bought on Feb 27 and the question was whether colleagues would corroborate. Now, 47 days later, after a clean Q1 open window (post-Feb 27 blackout lift through pre-Q1 blackout ~late March), we have zero corroboration. The committee's original tension — whether other insiders share McDermott's conviction or face compliance constraints — now tilts toward the former explanation. DOJ silence on the Q1 call weakens the compliance-friction excuse. That leaves the plain reading: colleagues genuinely don't share conviction at these prices, OR they prefer their large Feb 2026 RSU grants (260K+ shares combined) to personal-capital deployment. The 14% post-earnings selloff could catalyze repeat buying, but I note two tempering factors: (a) McDermott may want to avoid appearing to time the selloff on material negative news (guidance cut on margins) even if he thinks the selloff is overdone; (b) management focus per Mastantuono is 'integration,' not capital signaling. Drift modestly lower from 0.39.

Time decay is the dominant effect. 47 days into the window have elapsed without any additional insider purchases, and with DOJ silence removing the most plausible 'cannot buy' explanation, the remaining plausible explanation is 'chose not to buy.' The prior 0.39 was already slightly below the base-rate range (~30-45% for any insider buy after an initial CEO buy), reflecting committee concerns. Those concerns now compound — the 5 months remaining is less than 7 months, the window has been partially tested and shown no activity, and the only positive input (post-earnings selloff creating a second entry point) is speculative since the selloff may not persist into normal trading. Slight drift lower to 0.35.

I balance the negative revealed-preference signal (47 days of silence) against the positive catalytic setup (post-earnings selloff + Q2 open window reopening ~April 25). The selloff is the most important new variable: if NOW trades sub-$100 during the Q2 open window, the CEO's February playbook is directly replicable. McDermott has explicitly demonstrated both willingness and mechanical infrastructure (non-10b5-1 arrangement). The resolution criterion is broad — a single officer or director purchase of any size resolves YES — so the bar is low. Two open-window periods (~Apr 25-Jun 15 and ~Jul 25-Sep 30) provide ample opportunity. Counterbalancing: other insiders continued to not buy even during the post-Feb 27 open window, which is the strongest bearish evidence. Net essentially flat vs prior — marginal tick up to 0.40 reflecting my weighting of the fresh entry-point as a material new catalyst.

The no-buying-during-open-window signal is informative and I weight it heavily. Between Feb 27 and the Q1 earnings blackout (~2 weeks before April 22), insiders had approximately a month of open window. Zero additional purchases occurred. This is the strongest single piece of new evidence since baseline. Combined with Mastantuono's explicit 'integration priority' framing (which redirects executive attention away from capital-signaling) and the lack of any mention of DOJ (which removes the compliance-constraint excuse), the data leans bearish. The 14% selloff creates a fresh entry point, but (a) after-hours moves often partially reverse in regular trading, (b) the selloff is driven by margin guide cuts which are negative news — an insider buying into that could create optical issues, and (c) if McDermott genuinely viewed ~$90-95 as compelling, one might expect stronger framing during Q&A that did not materialize. Drift meaningfully lower to 0.34.

No new insider purchases disclosed at Q1 earnings. 47 days elapsed since CEO buy with no corroboration. Window now ~5 months vs. original 7. 14% post-earnings selloff creates potential second buy-opportunity but may not persist. DOJ silence is mildly positive (less compliance friction) but also removes the excuse for why no one else has bought. Slight drift lower from 0.39.

Zero additional purchases in 47 days is a strong negative signal. Baseline base rate (30-45%) assumed a 7-month window; now 5 months with 2 open-window periods remaining. Management focus per Mastantuono is integration, not signaling. Even though 14% selloff creates a fresh opportunity, the revealed preference of 'no buying during the Q1 open window' reflects genuine preferences not compliance. Lean lower to 0.32.

Two competing effects roughly offset. Negative: no additional buying in 47 days despite the Feb-late March window being open. Positive: 14% selloff creates a new sub-$100 entry opportunity mirroring McDermott's February setup, plus new CSO Gidwani adds a potential initial-officer buyer. The resolution criterion is broad (any insider, any purchase) and 2 open-window periods remain. DOJ silence is modestly positive for trading-window friction. Essentially flat to prior 0.39 — tick up to 0.40 reflecting the fresh catalyst.