Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Miscellaneous · ·
$10.66
▼ $0.30 (-2.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 05:33 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$1.29B
Day Range
$10.51 - $11.22
52-Week Range
$2.74 - $15.34
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$7.85
Resistance
$15.34
+100.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/31 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟡 Mixed
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: 62.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$1.53 vs. price $10.66 (-114.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (79/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
52
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
6d ago · $11.81
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
6d ago · $11.81
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 10 to 36 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
79
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
54
Risk
28
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
27
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent coverage has highlighted Digital Turbine’s strong stock performance, noting a 6% rise despite a shelf‑registration overhang, and emphasizing a reported turnaround marked by profitability, growth and potential 20% margins. Analysts point to the company’s AI‑driven ad‑tech monetization and its extensive app distribution footprint as drivers of rising mobile ad spend and improved return on ad spend.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Digital Turbine, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
44
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
52
Fundamentals
27
Technical
54
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+24%
Market Narrative
72
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+35
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for APPS suggests a disconnect between extreme sentiment (92/100) and weak momentum (-4.6% ROC), consistent with euphoric detachment from near-term price action. The 41.2% premium to the 200-day average, despite neutral RSI (47), implies investors may be prioritizing narrative over fundamentals—a classic narrative gap. The key open question is whether this disconnect will persist or if momentum will eventually correct the overvaluation. Low volatility (0.81x ATR) and peer underperformance (+5.5% vs. -2.0%) further reduce panic or herd-driven risks.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:30 AM
What could change this?
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 10D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 70/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 3/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for APPS reflects a clash between cyclical optimism and deep-value skepticism. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests the stock’s technical position is near oversold, aligning with a contrarian or cycle-based approach, while Peter Lynch and the efficient-market camp see only modest upside—assuming the price already baked in most of its growth potential. Meanwhile, the majority of methodologies—from Fisher’s lukewarm approval to Graham’s outright rejection—highlight either mediocre fundamentals, excessive risk, or a lack of defensive qualities, framing the stock as a speculative gamble rather than a core holding. Even the mid-tier signals from Veblen and Schwager indicate uncertainty about whether growth will translate into sustainable profits, underscoring a stock that appeals to some tactical traders but alarms disciplined, long-term investors.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 70
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 59
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 58
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 43
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
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)
🔴 35
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 32
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 16
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 13
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)
🔴 13
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 11
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 3
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 4 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.
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
56.9%
Operating Margin
6.0%
Net Margin
-6.7%
EBITDA Margin
18.7%
ROE
-19.6%
ROA
-4.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.33
Cash
$37.72M
Total Debt
$360.96M
Current Ratio
1.16
Debt/Equity
1.88
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$10.66
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$1.53
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-114.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-4.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -4.3% | $10.70M | $9.82M |
| 2 | -2.6% | $10.43M | $8.78M |
| 3 | -0.9% | $10.33M | $7.98M |
| 4 | 0.8% | $10.41M | $7.38M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $10.67M | $6.94M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$11.19M
Terminal Value
$168.33M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$109.41M
Enterprise Value
$150.30M
Net Debt
$323.24M
Equity Value
$-172.95M
*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
$1.70
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$2.20
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 5 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Trefis · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Trefis · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Trefis · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Trefis · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Zacks · 31.8.2026
Digital Turbine, Inc. (APPS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
APPS currently scores 52/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, APPS's estimated fair value is -$1.53, which is 114.4% below the current price of $10.66. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
APPS's technical score is 54/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: 62.9%; Free cash flow growth: 171.7%; Net income growth: 59.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$1.53 vs. price $10.66 (-114.4%); Net margin: -6.7% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for APPS.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STONE WILLIAM GORDON III | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 204,498 | +204,498 | — |
| STONE WILLIAM GORDON III | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 204,498 | +204,498 | $9.78 |
| John Benneaser | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 51,124 | +51,124 | — |
| Akkerman Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 76,687 | +76,687 | — |
| Kinsell Joshua | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 51,124 | +51,124 | $9.78 |
| Kinsell Joshua | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 51,124 | +51,124 | — |
| Akkerman Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 76,687 | +76,687 | $9.78 |
| John Benneaser | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.9.2026 | 51,124 | +51,124 | $9.78 |
| DEUTSCHMAN ROBERT M | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 662,170 | +23,753 | — |
| Groos Holyce Hess | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 163,127 | +19,390 | — |
| GYANI MOHAN S | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 77,863 | +19,159 | — |
| Chestnutt Roy H | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 270,154 | +18,928 | — |
| Karish Jeff | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 471,203 | +19,113 | — |
| STERLING MICHELLE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 170,163 | +18,951 | — |
| GYANI MOHAN S | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 19,159 | +19,159 | — |
| STERLING MICHELLE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 18,951 | +18,951 | — |
| Chestnutt Roy H | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 18,928 | +18,928 | — |
| Groos Holyce Hess | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 19,390 | +19,390 | — |
| Karish Jeff | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 19,113 | +19,113 | — |
| DEUTSCHMAN ROBERT M | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.8.2026 | 23,753 | +23,753 | — |
| Kinsell Joshua | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 264,102 | -556 | $10.87 |
| STONE WILLIAM GORDON III | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 1,742,786 | -2,612 | $10.87 |
| STONE WILLIAM GORDON III | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 2,612 | -2,612 | $10.87 |
| Kinsell Joshua | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.8.2026 | 556 | -556 | $10.87 |
| Kinsell Joshua | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.8.2026 | 618 | -618 | $8.12 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
10,181,516 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,723,879 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
50.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.2% 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