Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$90.74
▲ $0.20 (+0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:43 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$3.22B
Day Range
$90.04 - $92.01
52-Week Range
$41.47 - $98.52
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$78.21
Resistance
$98.52
+81.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/20 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 2.44 (3y annualized return 64.9% / max drawdown 26.6%)
Risk
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 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
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
58
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
43
Quality
42
Value
45
Momentum
61
Risk
58
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
61
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 Acadian Asset Management Inc. (AAMI) has highlighted its strong stock performance, with recurring themes of **growth momentum, technical strength, and analyst optimism**. Headlines emphasize its **top-tier technical ratings**, **accelerating earnings/revenue**, and **breakout potential**, alongside an **upward price target revision** from Evercore ISI. Additionally, an **insider share sale** and **rising implied volatility** in options were noted, though no major corporate developments were reported. The focus remains on its disciplined growth strategy and market outperformance.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Acadian Asset Management Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
43
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
61
Technical
61
Valuation
45
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+21%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+29
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
AAMI’s psychology is dominated by **euphoria**, driven by strong momentum (+1.4% ROC), extreme positive sentiment (100/100), and a 22% premium over its 200-day average. The disconnect between price gains and stagnant EPS growth (+0.0%) suggests **overconfidence** in near-term performance, while neutral RSI (52) and low volatility (0.92x ATR) indicate restrained panic or FOMO. The **narrative gap** (66 vs. 36) suggests traders may be overestimating tailwinds. The key question: *Will euphoria sustain, or will fundamentals rebalance momentum?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:32 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"ACADIAN ASSET MANAGEMENT (AAMI) shows strong growth with an 8/10 fundamental rating, top technical score, and breakout momentum."
"Evercore ISI Group analyst raises Acadian Asset Management price target from $87 to $96."
"Is Acadian Asset Management Inc. (AAMI) outperforming other Finance Stocks This Year?"
📈 17D 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
Edgar Lawrence Smith — 64/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 14/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between cautious optimism and outright skepticism about AAMI, reflecting stark differences in their core principles. Edgar Lawrence Smith’s moderate score suggests it could be a *reasonable* but not definitive long-term hold, implying a measured, rule-based approach that doesn’t demand conviction. In contrast, Fisher, Lynch, and Marks all flag red flags—Fisher because it lacks his signature of quality and growth, Lynch because it fails his ‘growth at a reasonable price’ test, and Marks because the risk/valuation mix aligns with his late-cycle caution. Meanwhile, Veblen and Mackay’s low scores point to behavioral concerns: Veblen sees it as growth-chasing without substance, while Mackay’s verdict hints at speculative crowd behavior. The middle ground—from Nelson’s ‘mid-cycle’ to Schwager’s ‘no clear edge’—shows a lack of decisive signals, while the lowest scores (Graham, Housel) either lack sufficient data or highlight volatility that would deter patient, long-term thinkers.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 64
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 61
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 54
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 50
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 47
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 41
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 36
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 30
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 25
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 21
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 14
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (5 bullish · 3 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 uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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
—
Operating Margin
23.4%
Net Margin
14.2%
EBITDA Margin
23.4%
ROE
—
ROA
11.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.21
Cash
$124.40M
Total Debt
$200.00M
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 11.9.2026 | $0.100 |
| 12.6.2026 | $0.100 |
| 11.6.2026 | $0.100 |
| 13.3.2026 | $0.100 |
| 12.3.2026 | $0.100 |
| 12.12.2025 | $0.010 |
| 11.12.2025 | $0.010 |
| 12.9.2025 | $0.010 |
| 11.9.2025 | $0.010 |
| 13.6.2025 | $0.010 |
| 12.6.2025 | $0.010 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.010 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 10 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 7.9.2026
Zacks · 19.8.2026
Zacks · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 17.8.2026
ChartMill · 15.8.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 10.8.2026
Benzinga · 10.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
MT Newswires · 6.8.2026
Fintel · 4.8.2026
Motley Fool · 4.8.2026
Zacks · 3.8.2026
Moby · 31.7.2026
Benzinga · 31.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.7.2026
Motley Fool · 31.7.2026
GuruFocus.com · 30.7.2026
MarketBeat · 30.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.7.2026
Acadian Asset Management Inc. (AAMI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, 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.
AAMI currently scores 58/100 (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.
AAMI's technical score is 61/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Calmar: 2.44 (3y annualized return 64.9% / max drawdown 26.6%); Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -0.5%; Net income growth: -5.9%.
Yes — AAMI has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 244 | -244 | $92.36 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 4.8.2026 | 0 | -244 | $92.36 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 17,389 | -17,389 | $87.49 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 3 | -3 | $88.11 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 7,978 | -7,978 | $86.61 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 17,636 | -7,978 | $86.61 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 247 | -17,389 | $87.49 |
| Wiater Christina | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 244 | -3 | $88.11 |
| PAULSON & CO. INC. | Open Market Sale | 17.6.2026 | 1,900,000 | -1,900,000 | $77.25 |
| PAULSON & CO. INC. | Open Market Sale | 17.6.2026 | 5,843,282 | -1,900,000 | $77.25 |
| Trebbi Barbara | Gift | 15.6.2026 | 10,260 | +10,260 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Gift | 15.6.2026 | 10,260 | -10,260 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Gift | 15.6.2026 | 28,797 | -10,260 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Gift | 15.6.2026 | 10,260 | +10,260 | — |
| Paulson John | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 2,253 | +2,253 | — |
| Chersi Robert J | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 1,288 | +1,288 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 1,288 | +1,288 | — |
| Paulson John | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 2,253 | +2,253 | — |
| Chersi Robert J | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 1,288 | +1,288 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 1,288 | +1,288 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 14.5.2026 | 3,286 | -3,286 | — |
| Trebbi Barbara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 14.5.2026 | 3,286 | +3,286 | — |
| Paulson John | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 14.5.2026 | 5,750 | -5,750 | — |
| Chersi Robert J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 14.5.2026 | 3,286 | -3,286 | — |
| Chersi Robert J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 14.5.2026 | 3,286 | +3,286 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
848,026 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 960,244 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 69.5% 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