Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$65.46
▲ $3.11 (+5.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$1.58B
Day Range
$62.94 - $66.00
52-Week Range
$22.12 - $91.61
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$54.87
Resistance
$88.72
AMBQ is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+98.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/27 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 96.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -54.5% (negative)
Fundamental
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
59
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $65.46
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 63)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
today · $65.46
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 32 to 64 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
54
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
78
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
35
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 Ambiq Micro, Inc. (AMBQ) has centered on its strong financial performance and analyst optimism following its Q2 2026 earnings report, where revenues grew year-over-year and exceeded estimates. Analysts have raised price targets significantly, with some projecting a 41% potential stock rally, while firms like UBS and Needham adjusted their targets upward to $73 and $85, respectively. The company’s upward earnings revisions and positive market sentiment remain key discussion points.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ambiq Micro, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 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
58
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
64
Fundamentals
35
Technical
78
Valuation
50
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price (3M)
-28%
Market Narrative
84
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+49
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant **Loss Aversion** (score 50) reflects a defensive posture after a 22.9% drop over three months, with traders prioritizing damage control over aggressive bets. The **Confirmation Bias** (score 34) and **narrative gap** (+26) suggest investors selectively favor optimistic narratives despite stagnant fundamentals, creating a disconnect between perception and reality. Meanwhile, **FOMO** and **Euphoria** are muted by weak momentum (-2.9% ROC) and neutral technical indicators (RSI 42), while **Herding** and **Overconfidence** are absent due to divergence from peers and lagging fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will hold near support (4.5% above) or if a break could trigger further risk-off behavior.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 03:44 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Analysts raised price targets after strong Q2 results"
"Average price targets indicate 41% potential upside"
"Positive trend in earnings estimate revisions"
"Ambiq's Q2 earnings surpass estimates, revenues rise Y/Y"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 13D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for AMBQ reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors assess risk, valuation, and market psychology. At the top, Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights his focus on liquidity and resilience in crises, suggesting the stock could weather financial stress—an approach starkly contrasting with Morgan Housel’s zero, which flags volatility as a deterrent for patient, long-term holders. Meanwhile, the mid-tier scores from Nelson, Schwager, and Marks (cycle) align on favorable market positioning and disciplined setups, while Peter Lynch and Howard Marks (both) caution that growth may already be priced in, revealing a tension between opportunity and overvaluation. At the bottom, Fisher, Smith, and Livermore reject the stock outright for lacking quality, stability, or trend alignment, underscoring how rigid criteria can override even cyclical or liquidity-based optimism.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 72
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 65
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 54
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 43
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 35
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 28
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 27
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
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)
🔴 12
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 9
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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
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 (9 bullish · 2 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.
Medium 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
44.3%
Operating Margin
-54.5%
Net Margin
-50.3%
EBITDA Margin
-44.6%
ROE
-22.4%
ROA
-19.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$4.57
Cash
$140.28M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
8.76
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$20.37
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$18.91
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 8 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 18.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 12.8.2026
MT Newswires · 12.8.2026
MT Newswires · 12.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
Motley Fool · 12.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 11.8.2026
Moby · 11.8.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 11.8.2026
MarketBeat · 11.8.2026
Ambiq Micro, Inc. (AMBQ) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 59/100, 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.
AMBQ currently scores 59/100 (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.
AMBQ's technical score is 78/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 96.0%; Current ratio: 8.76; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -54.5% (negative); Net margin: -50.3% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AMBQ.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 12 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen Sean Chihhsiang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 15,000 | +15,000 | $8.12 |
| Chen Sean Chihhsiang | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | — |
| ZHANG KER | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 1,785 | +1,785 | $5.88 |
| Chen Sean Chihhsiang | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 12,874 | -12,874 | $57.09 |
| ZHANG KER | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 185 | -185 | $56.92 |
| ZHANG KER | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 4.9.2026 | 1,785 | -1,785 | — |
| Chen Sean Chihhsiang | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 2,126 | -2,126 | $57.68 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 9,575 | -9,575 | $56.77 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 11,027 | +11,027 | $12.60 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 11,027 | -11,027 | — |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,452 | -1,452 | $56.15 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 48,973 | -48,973 | $56.39 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 48,973 | +48,973 | $12.60 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 48,973 | -48,973 | — |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 13,500 | -13,500 | — |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 15,600 | -15,600 | $56.81 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 13,500 | +13,500 | $8.12 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 5,501 | -5,501 | $57.75 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,100 | -2,100 | $58.52 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 35,000 | -35,000 | — |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 13,800 | -13,800 | $57.70 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 44,271 | +44,271 | $12.60 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 31.8.2026 | 9,271 | -9,271 | — |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 5,600 | -5,600 | $58.46 |
| Esaka Fumihide | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 5,899 | -5,899 | $56.87 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,809,791 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,763,291 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.4% 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