Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
16.30 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:55 PM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
16.02 ₪ - 16.73 ₪
52-Week Range
15.05 ₪ - 72.99 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
15.05 ₪
Resistance
28.80 ₪
ARYT.TA is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-52.7% (1Y)
🔴 Weak
Strengths: 2/12 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
MACD
MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 6.4% of price
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 0 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 0
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.
ARYT.TA’s overall score of 23 reflects a stock currently under significant technical and risk-based pressure, despite a neutral news environment. The technical category is particularly weak, with the stock trading below both its 50-day (10.2%) and 200-day (18.5%) moving averages, signaling a prolonged downtrend. The MACD histogram’s negative reading and an RSI of 26.3—paired with a %K of 19.4—indicate extreme oversold conditions, though this may also suggest a potential short-term rebound if momentum reverses. Risk metrics further compound concerns, as the average true range (ATR) of 7.5% of price highlights volatility, while a Calmar ratio of 1.28 (with a 77.9% max drawdown over three years) underscores the stock’s historically volatile and high-risk profile. The lack of news-driven evidence in the score suggests the current valuation is driven purely by market sentiment and technical performance rather than external catalysts.
The stock is trading below both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, with a negative MACD histogram and an RSI of 26.3, indicating extreme oversold conditions and falling momentum.
This suggests a prolonged bearish trend with potential for short-term volatility, though oversold levels may attract speculative buying.
There is no recent or relevant news data contributing to the score, meaning the valuation is driven entirely by technical and risk factors.
This removes external catalysts as a driver of the stock’s movement, leaving it dependent on market psychology and technical performance.
The ATR of 7.5% of price indicates high volatility, while a Calmar ratio of 1.28 (with a 77.9% max drawdown) highlights significant historical risk and drawdown sensitivity.
These metrics suggest the stock carries elevated risk, particularly for investors with lower risk tolerance or shorter time horizons.
StockIQ conclusion
ARYT.TA’s weak overall score of 23 is driven primarily by its technical weakness and elevated risk profile, with no supporting news factors. The stock’s extreme oversold conditions and negative momentum suggest potential short-term volatility, but the absence of moving average support and high historical drawdowns indicate sustained downside risk. While speculative buying could emerge from oversold levels, the lack of fundamental catalysts and persistent risk metrics make the outlook cautious. Investors should closely monitor technical reversals and news developments, as these will be the primary drivers of future movement.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
40
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
35
Risk
42
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING ARYT.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
59
Fundamentals
—
Technical
35
Valuation
—
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-48%
Market Narrative
38
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is overwhelmingly consistent with **loss aversion**, as the stock’s steep 3-month decline (-43.0%) and subdued trading volume (0.79x average) suggest traders are hesitant to crystallize losses. While panic selling (47) is present, it lacks the volatility spike or extreme volume that would confirm a full-blown selloff. The narrative gap (-17) hints at a disconnect between market sentiment (33) and objective reality (50), possibly reinforcing caution. The key open question is whether the subdued volume reflects genuine reluctance to sell or merely a pause before further downside. The absence of FOMO or euphoria further supports the idea that traders are prioritizing risk avoidance over chasing gains or losses.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 04:34 PM
What could change this?
📈 12D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a deep split between methodologies that prioritize macro positioning and those that demand granular, data-rich analysis. The highest-scoring models—Mackay, Smith, and Marks (cycle-based)—all see it as a low-risk, cyclically favorable opportunity, with no signs of crowd-driven euphoria or overvaluation. Meanwhile, the technical and risk-averse approaches (Livermore, Loeb, Housel) reject it outright, flagging either a negative trend or excessive volatility that would violate core tenets of trend-following or patience-based investing. The middle ground is occupied by disciplined, reward/risk-focused thinkers like Schwager and Marks (general), who acknowledge potential but temper enthusiasm with caution, while the deep-value and growth-oriented frameworks (Graham, Fisher, Lynch) simply lack sufficient data to form a meaningful opinion. The contrast underscores how context—whether cyclical positioning, trend alignment, or fundamental visibility—drives wildly different conclusions.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 100
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 84
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 75
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
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%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Not enough growth/insider data for a real Veblen read
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
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: 0%
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 45
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 26
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
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 255 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 6 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 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 28.8.2026 | 311.440 ₪ |
| 3.6.2026 | 26.000 ₪ |
| 2.6.2026 | 26.000 ₪ |
| 9.4.2026 | 77.000 ₪ |
| 8.4.2026 | 77.000 ₪ |
| 7.9.2025 | 13.000 ₪ |
| 6.9.2025 | 13.000 ₪ |
| 21.4.2025 | 10.000 ₪ |
| 20.4.2025 | 10.000 ₪ |
| 4.4.2024 | 11.800 ₪ |
| 3.4.2024 | 11.800 ₪ |
| 23.3.2023 | 9.000 ₪ |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 0 positive, 0 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 0 articles.
No recent articles found for this stock.
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Aryt Industries Ltd (ARYT.TA) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for ARYT.TA specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
ARYT.TA's technical score is 35/100, 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: MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; Price is above the SAR point — uptrend.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 6.4% of price; Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — ARYT.TA has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology