Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$38.34
▲ $3.43 (+9.8%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:24 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$5.78B
Day Range
$36.00 - $38.57
52-Week Range
$20.55 - $74.98
Beta
—
Next Earnings
17.11.2026
Support
$20.55
Resistance
$39.56
-41.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 15/29 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 161.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $3.03 vs. price $38.34 (-92.1%)
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
55
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 · $38.34
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
today · $38.34
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 27 to 63 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
4d ago · $37.62
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 55)
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
46
Quality
55
Value
38
Momentum
74
Risk
46
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
31
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 **Bullish** has centered on its strategic investments and market positioning. The company received attention for its $100 million funding injection into **USD.AI**, a cryptocurrency-focused AI chip venture, highlighting its push into emerging tech. Analysts have rated Bullish a speculative *Buy*, noting its tokenized securities focus and undervalued stock relative to analyst targets. Additionally, Cathie Wood’s association with Bullish—amid broader crypto stock surges—has drawn media scrutiny, particularly regarding its tokenized stock offerings and market momentum.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bullish. News trend score: 98. Reason: 12 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
57
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
80
Fundamentals
31
Technical
74
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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.
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 (3M)
+59%
Market Narrative
94
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
+42
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for BLSH suggests a dominant **overconfidence** bias, amplified by extreme valuation disconnects (+1073% DCF) and momentum decoupling from fundamentals. Euphoria and FOMO further reinforce this, as overbought conditions and perfect news sentiment create a feedback loop. The key open question is whether this narrative gap (100 vs. 52) will persist or if a reversion to fundamentals emerges. Herding remains muted, indicating selective participation rather than broad conviction.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:20 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Cathie Wood buys Robinhood shares as the firm faces criticism over tokenized stock offerings."
"Bullish is providing $100 million in funding to USD.AI for AI Chip Financing"
"Stocks rallied and Treasury yields retreated... after Fed Governor Waller signaled he could back a rate hold, sending bitcoin above $80,000."
"ASST stock has nearly doubled so far this month, while MSTR shares have gained around 30%."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 16D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 6/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological disagreements about what makes a sound investment. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights its liquidity resilience, suggesting it could weather financial stress—a stark contrast to the market-cycle skepticism of Howard Marks, who sees it as late-stage and risky. Meanwhile, value-oriented investors like Benjamin Graham and Edgar Lawrence Smith find it only moderately appealing, lacking the clear margin of safety or deep undervaluation they demand, while growth-focused thinkers like Peter Lynch and Thorstein Veblen dismiss it outright, seeing either no reasonable growth or speculative excess. The divide between trend-followers like Jesse Livermore (who sees positive momentum) and cycle-aware investors like Nelson (who flags overbought conditions) further underscores whether the stock’s strength lies in its near-term price action or its long-term fundamentals.
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)
🟢 73
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 57
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 56
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 56
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 52
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 44
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 32
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 29
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 13
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 6
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 3 bearish · 0 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.
High 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
0.0%
Operating Margin
-0.3%
Net Margin
-0.3%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-23.8%
ROA
-19.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$5.99
Cash
$87.89M
Total Debt
$49.98M
Current Ratio
29.28
Debt/Equity
0.18
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$38.34
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$3.03
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-92.1%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $20.57M | $18.87M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $22.24M | $18.72M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $23.63M | $18.25M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $24.67M | $17.47M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $25.28M | $16.43M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$18.70M
Terminal Value
$398.70M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$259.13M
Enterprise Value
$348.88M
Net Debt
$-37.91M
Equity Value
$386.79M
*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
$21.32
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$21.12
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 4 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Barrons.com · 14.9.2026
Fintel · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
The Fly · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Bullish (BLSH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 55/100, 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.
BLSH currently scores 55/100 (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, BLSH's estimated fair value is $3.03, which is 92.1% below the current price of $38.34. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BLSH'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: Free cash flow growth: 161.6%; Debt/equity: 0.18; Current ratio: 29.28.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $3.03 vs. price $38.34 (-92.1%); Operating margin: -0.3% (negative); Net margin: -0.3% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BLSH.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 15 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wynn Andrew Charles | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 5,877 | +5,877 | — |
| Simon Karen Jo | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 5,877 | +5,877 | — |
| Bliss Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 5,877 | +5,877 | — |
| Yuan Kokuei | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 5,877 | +5,877 | — |
| Blumer Brendan Francis | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 5,877 | +5,877 | — |
| Wynn Andrew Charles | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.7.2026 | 2,063 | +2,063 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 50,146 | -50,146 | $44.27 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 21,050 | -21,050 | $43.47 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 5,500 | -5,500 | $42.25 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 3,304 | -3,304 | $44.95 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 74,500 | -5,500 | $42.25 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 53,450 | -21,050 | $43.47 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 3,304 | -50,146 | $44.27 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 11.5.2026 | 0 | -3,304 | $44.95 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 247 | +247 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 247 | -247 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 4,973,281 | -247 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 5.5.2026 | 4,973,528 | +247 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.4.2026 | 80,000 | -80,000 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.4.2026 | 80,000 | +80,000 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.4.2026 | 80,000 | +80,000 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.4.2026 | 4,893,528 | -80,000 | — |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 10.4.2026 | 1,100 | -1,100 | $37.34 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 10.4.2026 | 49,042 | -49,042 | $36.56 |
| Farley Thomas W | Open Market Sale | 10.4.2026 | 29,858 | -29,858 | $36.13 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
8,564,500 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 8,509,147 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 63.9% 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