Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
392.20 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:53 PM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
381.20 ₪ - 392.20 ₪
52-Week Range
297.10 ₪ - 513.10 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
379.00 ₪
Resistance
432.00 ₪
AZRG.TA is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
+20.7% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 1/12 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
CMF (money flow)
CMF 20 days: 0.30
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
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.
AZRG.TA’s overall investor score of 64 reflects a mixed but cautiously optimistic technical profile, tempered by modest news sentiment and moderate risk exposure. The technical category (72) stands out as the strongest, driven by clear bullish signals like the price trading above the 50-day moving average, a positive MACD histogram indicating rising momentum, and an RSI of 58.7—all of which suggest short-term upward pressure. However, the stock’s position below the 200-day average and an overbought %K (90.7) introduce caution, signaling potential near-term consolidation or reversal. News sentiment (50) lacks specific data points, leaving its influence ambiguous but neutral. Risk metrics (50) reveal a volatile but historically rewarding asset, with a Calmar ratio of 1.08 highlighting a balanced risk-reward tradeoff despite a notable 25.2% drawdown over three years. The interplay of these factors creates a nuanced picture: while technicals favor an uptrend, structural and risk factors demand vigilance.
The stock exhibits strong short-term momentum (MACD positive, RSI 58.7, price above 50-day average) but is overbought (%K 90.7) and remains below its 200-day average, suggesting a potential mid-term pullback.
Short-term momentum indicators drive trading decisions, while longer-term averages and overbought conditions can signal impending volatility or correction.
No specific news data points are available to assess sentiment, leaving the category neutral with no directional influence.
Lack of news context means the stock’s performance is driven purely by technical and fundamental factors rather than external events.
The ATR (2.6% of price) indicates moderate volatility, while the Calmar ratio (1.08) suggests a historically stable risk-adjusted return despite a 25.2% drawdown over three years.
A balanced Calmar ratio implies the stock has delivered strong returns relative to its drawdowns, but past volatility remains a key consideration for risk management.
StockIQ conclusion
AZRG.TA demonstrates a resilient short-term technical profile with clear upward momentum, supported by positive MACD and RSI readings. However, its position below the 200-day average and overbought conditions introduce caution, while the lack of news data leaves its narrative undefined. Risk metrics reveal a historically rewarding but volatile asset, with a Calmar ratio suggesting disciplined risk management could yield strong returns. The stock’s score reflects a balanced outlook: strong technicals offset by structural and risk factors, necessitating careful monitoring of overbought signals and longer-term trends.
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
34
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
15d ago · $409.40
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 7 to 34 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 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
24
Risk
50
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 AZRG.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
5
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
—
Technical
24
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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)
-3%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a dominant **herding** bias, where traders align with peer underperformance rather than chasing momentum or sentiment. The stock’s slight outperformance relative to peers (-1.2% vs -1.7%) may signal cautious imitation of broader sector trends. FOMO is muted by neutral RSI and modest momentum, while anchoring is weak despite proximity to support. The narrow narrative gap (-2) implies no major disconnect between market perception and fundamentals, leaving the key question: *Will this relative underperformance persist, or will traders reassess if peers stabilize?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:40 PM
What could change this?
📈 11D 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
Jesse Livermore — 20/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Charles Mackay’s and Edgar Lawrence Smith’s high scores, the model estimates no crowd mania and a lack of dividend/growth data but overall a clean bill of health for the stock. Samuel Armstrong Nelson, Howard Marks (both cycle and risk lenses), and Gerald Loeb all see a favorable or reasonably priced position, reflecting their emphasis on cycle timing and risk assessment. Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, Walter Bagehot, Thorstein Veblen, and Graham‑Enterprising each default to neutral 50 scores because their methodologies require detailed balance‑sheet, growth, or insider information that is missing for this security. Meanwhile, Jack Schwager finds no clear edge, the efficient‑market view reports mixed evidence, Morgan Housel rates it moderately holdable, and Jesse Livermore flags a negative trend, illustrating how trend‑following and index‑efficiency perspectives can diverge from the more data‑driven assessments.
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 75
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 72
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 70
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)
🟡 61
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 53
Moderate risk 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)
🟡 52
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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
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%
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 49
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 20
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
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 (1 bullish · 7 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.
Low 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 |
|---|---|
| 15.4.2026 | 682.928 ₪ |
| 14.4.2026 | 682.928 ₪ |
| 21.4.2025 | 659.670 ₪ |
| 20.4.2025 | 659.670 ₪ |
| 9.4.2024 | 824.587 ₪ |
| 8.4.2024 | 824.587 ₪ |
| 24.4.2023 | 577.211 ₪ |
| 23.4.2023 | 577.211 ₪ |
| 24.4.2022 | 535.982 ₪ |
| 23.4.2022 | 535.982 ₪ |
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 Azrieli Group Ltd (AZRG.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 AZRG.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.
AZRG.TA's technical score is 24/100, 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: CMF 20 days: 0.30.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — AZRG.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