Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Energy · ·
$265.63
▼ $15.13 (-5.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 04:30 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$75.56B
Day Range
$265.00 - $285.10
52-Week Range
$61.37 - $351.28
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$157.33
Resistance
$288.00
BE is a stock from the Energy sector — Oil, gas, and renewable energy — highly volatile profitability, dependent on global commodity prices.
+228.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/31 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 37.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $4.77 vs. price $265.63 (-98.2%)
Fair Value
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
54
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
14d ago · $252.87
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 18 to 59 day-over-day
What happened after
14d ago · $252.87
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 57)
What happened after
14d ago · $252.87
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 8 to 67 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
54
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
74
Risk
50
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
28
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 Bloom Energy Corporation has centered on its inclusion in the S&P 500 index, marking a notable milestone for the company. Headlines highlight its stock surge—up to 8%—following the addition, driven partly by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s reported $3 million investment. Analysts discuss whether this reflects a re-rating of the stock, with some suggesting Bloom Energy is now "fully priced" and others urging investors to consider buying. The focus remains on its market momentum and potential as a leader in energy technology.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bloom Energy Corporation. News trend score: 80. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
66
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
81
Fundamentals
28
Technical
74
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
92
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+51
🔀 Weak-Conviction Rally
Price is moving, but not accompanied by a matching rise in news attention/sentiment.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s extreme overconfidence (97) suggests traders are ignoring fundamental growth (-1.8% EPS) while chasing momentum (+36.3% ROC) and detached valuation (+5713% vs. DCF). FOMO (70) and euphoria (69) reinforce this detachment, with sentiment (80/100) and overbought conditions (RSI 72) fueling speculative behavior. The massive narrative gap (51) further implies traders are prioritizing price action over fundamentals. The key question is whether this disconnect will persist or if a correction will test the anchoring near resistance (3.4%).
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:59 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Bloom Energy Surges 8% as S&P 500 swaps it in for Trade Desk"
"Pelosi bets $3 million on Bloom Energy — then it got added to the S&P 500"
"Bloom Energy Outpaces Its Industry in a Month: Time to Buy the Stock?"
"Bloom Energy is Fully Priced: Is a Re-rating Coming?"
📈 22D 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
Philip Fisher — 75/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 20/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with Philip Fisher standing out as the lone strong advocate, calling it an 'exceptional company quality' by his rigorous standards. Meanwhile, the majority of models—especially those emphasizing defensive value (Graham, Marks, Nelson) or market psychology (Mackay, Veblen)—reject it outright, flagging risks like overvaluation, speculative bubbles, or late-cycle warning signs. Even the efficient-market camp dismisses it as a weak case for stock-picking, while Lynch and Loeb’s stricter growth and risk thresholds further downgrade its appeal. The contrast highlights Fisher’s focus on long-term competitive advantage versus the cautionary approaches of others, who prioritize safety, valuation discipline, or macroeconomic timing.
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 75
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
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)
🟢 71
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 69
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 53
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 48
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
🟡 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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 40
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 35
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)
🔴 35
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
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
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 23
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 22
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)
🔴 21
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 20
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.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 2 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.
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.
Gross Margin
29.6%
Operating Margin
-1.3%
Net Margin
-4.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-11.5%
ROA
-2.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.37
Cash
$2.45B
Total Debt
$2.62B
Current Ratio
5.98
Debt/Equity
3.73
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$265.63
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$4.77
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-98.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
19.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 19.7% | $68.45M | $62.80M |
| 2 | 15.4% | $78.98M | $66.48M |
| 3 | 11.1% | $87.74M | $67.75M |
| 4 | 6.8% | $93.71M | $66.38M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $96.05M | $62.43M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$57.19M
Terminal Value
$1.51B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$984.41M
Enterprise Value
$1.31B
Net Debt
$163.77M
Equity Value
$1.15B
*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
$2.74
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.66
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 7 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
BE currently scores 54/100 (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, BE's estimated fair value is $4.77, which is 98.2% below the current price of $265.63. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BE's technical score is 74/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 37.3%; Free cash flow growth: 72.5%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $4.77 vs. price $265.63 (-98.2%); Operating margin: -1.3% (negative); Net margin: -4.4% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BE.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 16 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sridhar KR | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 9,688 | +9,688 | $30.96 |
| Sridhar KR | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 9,688 | -9,688 | — |
| Sridhar KR | Gift | 31.8.2026 | 300,000 | -300,000 | — |
| Edwards Simon Stephen | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 25,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Edwards Simon Stephen | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| IMMELT JEFFREY R | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 30,000 | -30,000 | $238.91 |
| SODERBERG SHAWN MARIE | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 2,895 | -2,895 | $233.60 |
| Chitoori Satish | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 2,053 | -2,053 | $241.64 |
| Joshi Aman | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 4,677 | -4,677 | $241.75 |
| CHAMBERS JOHN T | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | $250.00 |
| CHAMBERS JOHN T | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 208,333 | -15,000 | $250.00 |
| CHAMBERS JOHN T | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | $205.58 |
| CHAMBERS JOHN T | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 223,333 | -15,000 | $205.58 |
| Joshi Aman | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 8,343 | -8,343 | $300.37 |
| Joshi Aman | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 163,807 | -8,343 | $300.37 |
| IMMELT JEFFREY R | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 85 | +85 | $302.70 |
| WARNER CYNTHIA J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 76 | +76 | $302.70 |
| IMMELT JEFFREY R | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 231,243 | +85 | $302.70 |
| WARNER CYNTHIA J | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 34,895 | +76 | $302.70 |
| Joshi Aman | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 3,558 | -3,558 | $289.14 |
| Kurzymski Maciej | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 2,259 | -2,259 | $288.62 |
| SODERBERG SHAWN MARIE | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 2,842 | -2,842 | $288.63 |
| Chitoori Satish | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 2,837 | -2,837 | $289.11 |
| SODERBERG SHAWN MARIE | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 132,265 | -2,842 | $288.63 |
| CHAMBERS JOHN T | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 55,000 | -55,000 | $297.69 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
19,210,585 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 20,361,513 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
48.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.5% 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