Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$0.51
▼ $0.01 (-1.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 06:05 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$71.47M
Day Range
$0.51 - $0.55
52-Week Range
$0.36 - $4.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
11.01.2027
Support
$0.36
Resistance
$0.72
-86.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/30 factors positiveRisk: High
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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 109.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$3.04 vs. price $0.51 (-694.8%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
75/100
Similarity
7
Historical Matches
70/100
Analog Quality
-40.7%
Median 40D Outcome
42/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
0%
— … —
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
100%
-32.4% … -14.3%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 7 similar historical cases for this stock, 0% (95% CI 0%–35%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -22.5%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
1 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 14% (3%–51%) | -11.6% | -16.8% … -7.3% | -3.9% |
| 10D | 14% (3%–51%) | -15.1% | -18.1% … -10.0% | -10.9% |
| 20D | 0% (0%–35%) | -22.5% | -32.4% … -14.3% | -21.8% |
| 40D | 0% (0%–35%) | -40.7% | -44.4% … -37.6% | -31.6% |
| 60D | 0% (0%–35%) | -48.1% | -51.9% … -38.2% | -46.4% |
Sample size: 7 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-25 | 75/100 | ✓ High Volatility | -36.3% | -50.4% |
| 2026-04-09 | 69/100 | ✓ High Volatility | -8.3% | -48.1% |
| 2026-03-09 | 68/100 | ✓ High Volatility | -22.5% | -45.1% |
| 2026-04-29 | 66/100 | High Volatility | -3.5% | -53.5% |
| 2026-05-13 | 63/100 | High Volatility | -33.3% | -57.6% |
| 2026-06-01 | 63/100 | High Volatility | -31.4% | -31.4% |
| 2026-06-16 | 59/100 | High Volatility | -20.3% | -26.1% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity.
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
37
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
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
46
Quality
47
Value
43
Momentum
23
Risk
32
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
30
Institutional
46
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.
Everyone's writing about AI Financial Corporation. News trend score: 56. Reason: 1 of the last 14 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
8
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
61
Fundamentals
30
Technical
23
Valuation
43
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-24%
Market Narrative
40
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
📈 3D 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
Charles Mackay — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 12/100
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 98
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 91
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 82
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 70
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 70
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 56
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 45
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 45
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
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)
🔴 33
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 33
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 12
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
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
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 bearish · 1 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 downtrend 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
41.0%
Operating Margin
-92.0%
Net Margin
-1386.9%
EBITDA Margin
-78.6%
ROE
-29.9%
ROA
-28.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$5.91
Cash
$6.22M
Total Debt
$563.00K
Current Ratio
0.57
Debt/Equity
0.00
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$0.51
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$3.04
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-694.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-8.96M | $-8.22M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-10.70M | $-9.00M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-12.17M | $-9.39M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-13.16M | $-9.32M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-13.48M | $-8.76M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-7.17M
Terminal Value
$-212.63M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-138.20M
Enterprise Value
$-182.90M
Net Debt
$-5.66M
Equity Value
$-177.24M
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$19.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$19.15
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 1 positive, 13 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 14 articles.
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Bankless · 28.8.2026
ChartMill · 14.8.2026
Reuters · 8.8.2026
Reuters · 8.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 22.7.2026
Reuters · 14.7.2026
MT Newswires · 14.7.2026
Business Wire · 14.7.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 8.7.2026
Business Wire · 7.7.2026
Benzinga · 15.6.2026
AI Financial Corporation (AIFC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 37/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
AIFC currently scores 37/100 (Weak) 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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, AIFC's estimated fair value is -$3.04, which is 694.8% below the current price of $0.51. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AIFC's technical score is 23/100, which currently reads as bearish — 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: Revenue growth (last year): 109.0%; Debt/equity: 0.00; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$3.04 vs. price $0.51 (-694.8%); Operating margin: -92.0% (negative); Net margin: -1386.9% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AIFC.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 6 purchases and 7 sales out of the last 21 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DANZIGER DAVID C. | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2025 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $7.30 |
| DANZIGER DAVID C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.7.2025 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $7.88 |
| Johnson Virland A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.5.2025 | 125,000 | +125,000 | — |
| Johnson Virland A | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.5.2025 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $0.01 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Purchase | 6.12.2024 | 3,000 | +3,000 | $3.00 |
| Tassiopoulos Peter | Open Market Purchase | 9.9.2024 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $2.06 |
| Johnson Virland A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.1.2023 | 78,617 | +78,617 | — |
| Isaac Antonios | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.1.2023 | 125,787 | +125,787 | — |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 24.5.2021 | 32,933 | -32,933 | $6.70 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 5.2.2021 | 4,112 | -4,112 | $8.65 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 3.11.2020 | 1,469 | -1,469 | $3.61 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 31.3.2020 | 4,900 | -4,900 | $2.19 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 27.3.2020 | 1,900 | -1,900 | $2.21 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Sale | 25.3.2020 | 6,686 | -6,686 | $2.19 |
| Isaac Capital Group, LLC | Open Market Sale | 25.4.2019 | 149,679 | -149,679 | $78.29 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Purchase | 29.8.2018 | 30,000 | +30,000 | $1.00 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2018 | 15,000 | +15,000 | $0.78 |
| Johnson Virland A | Open Market Purchase | 24.8.2018 | 15,000 | +15,000 | $0.71 |
| MATULA TIMOTHY | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2018 | 560,000 | +560,000 | — |
| Johnson Virland A | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2018 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Isaac Capital Group, LLC | Other Transaction | 18.8.2017 | 14,141.812 | +14,141.812 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
13,126,740 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,743,304 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 49.1% 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