Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$7.16
▲ $0.26 (+3.8%)
Market data updated: 09/18 09:18 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$6.85 - $7.23
52-Week Range
$6.11 - $28.37
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
BRCB is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-75.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/29 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
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 24.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$46.67 vs. price $7.16 (-751.8%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (60/100), 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 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.
🗓️ 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
41
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
60
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
34
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
36
Institutional
85
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 Black Rock Coffee Bar, Inc. has focused solely on its aggressive expansion strategy, highlighting the opening of three new locations in August and September 2026: Colorado Springs (August 30), Tucson (August 29), and Lake Elsinore, California (September 2). The company, known for specialty coffees, teas, smoothies, and Fuel® energy drinks, has marked these as its 6th stores in Colorado and California, underscoring its growth momentum. No other operational or financial details were provided.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Black Rock Coffee Bar, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
38
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
83
Fundamentals
36
Technical
13
Valuation
38
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Price (3M)
-11%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
BRCB’s psychology is fragmented, with **herding** as the dominant state (32) due to relative underperformance against peers today. The **FOMO** signal (24) reflects positive momentum and sentiment, but the lack of extreme volume or RSI oversold conditions keeps it secondary. A **narrative gap** (65 vs. 36) suggests investors may be overestimating fundamentals relative to technicals. The key question: *Will underperformance persist, or will positive sentiment reignite momentum?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:24 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Black Rock Coffee Bar is growing its footprint in California with the opening of a new store in Lake Elsinore."
"Black Rock Coffee Bar is expanding its footprint in Colorado with a new location opening this week."
"Baird downgrades Black Rock Coffee Bar to Neutral From Outperform, Price Target is $10."
📈 11D 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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 11/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies diverge sharply on BRCB, with some approaches seeing cautious opportunity while others flag severe risks. The highest-scoring models—Livermore (69), Lynch (67), and Veblen (65)—suggest a mixed but not overwhelming case, with Lynch noting the price may already reflect growth and Livermore avoiding it due to unclear trends. Meanwhile, the middle-tier scores (Smith, Mackay, and the Efficient Market view) hint at moderate interest or speculative excitement, though none advocate strong conviction. In contrast, the lower-scoring methodologies—particularly Graham (21), Housel (19), and Nelson (13)—paint a far more pessimistic picture, warning of volatility, overvaluation, or fundamental weaknesses that would disqualify the stock under strict defensive or cycle-based principles. The contrast underscores a fundamental tension: some frameworks tolerate speculative or cyclical exposure, while others demand ironclad fundamentals or liquidity before even considering entry.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 67
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 65
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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)
🟡 60
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 55
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 36
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 30
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)
🔴 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 21
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 19
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 14
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 11
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
Based on the last 254 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 bearish · 1 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.
Gross Margin
50.9%
Operating Margin
0.5%
Net Margin
-8.2%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-36.0%
ROA
-4.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.00
Cash
$28.41M
Total Debt
$26.75M
Current Ratio
1.04
Debt/Equity
0.59
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$7.16
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$46.67
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-751.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
22.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 22.7% | $-40.11M | $-36.80M |
| 2 | 17.6% | $-47.17M | $-39.71M |
| 3 | 12.6% | $-53.11M | $-41.01M |
| 4 | 7.5% | $-57.12M | $-40.46M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-58.54M | $-38.05M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-32.70M
Terminal Value
$-923.19M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-600.01M
Enterprise Value
$-796.03M
Net Debt
$-1.65M
Equity Value
$-794.38M
*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
$0.91
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.80
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 4 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
MarketBeat · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 28.8.2026
Investing.com · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 15.8.2026
Black Rock Coffee Bar, Inc. (BRCB) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
BRCB currently scores 41/100 (Weak) 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, BRCB's estimated fair value is -$46.67, which is 751.8% below the current price of $7.16. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BRCB's technical score is 13/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 24.5%; Net income growth: 99.2%; Gross margin: 50.9% — strong.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$46.67 vs. price $7.16 (-751.8%); Net margin: -8.2% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BRCB.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 11 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braithwaite Andrew Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 8,949 | +8,949 | — |
| Hernandez Jeffrey Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 10,739 | +10,739 | — |
| CASHMAN KRISTINA K | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 10,739 | +10,739 | — |
| Brand Daniel Jordan | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 10,739 | +10,739 | — |
| FEDERICO RICHARD L | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 10,739 | +10,739 | — |
| Goldsmith-Grover Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 8,949 | +8,949 | — |
| FEDERICO RICHARD L | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 13,551 | +10,739 | — |
| CASHMAN KRISTINA K | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 13,551 | +10,739 | — |
| Goldsmith-Grover Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 11,761 | +8,949 | — |
| Hernandez Jeffrey Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 13,551 | +10,739 | — |
| Brand Daniel Jordan | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 13,551 | +10,739 | — |
| Braithwaite Andrew Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.5.2026 | 11,761 | +8,949 | — |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 22.5.2026 | 8 | +8 | $6.90 |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 22.5.2026 | 925 | +925 | $6.86 |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 22.5.2026 | 58,505 | +925 | $6.86 |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 22.5.2026 | 58,513 | +8 | $6.90 |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 21.5.2026 | 45,080 | +45,080 | $6.51 |
| Geyer Clay Howard | Open Market Purchase | 21.5.2026 | 57,580 | +45,080 | $6.51 |
| Schmidt Michael Ryan | Open Market Purchase | 20.5.2026 | 7,100 | +7,100 | $6.98 |
| Wegener-Beyer Jessica Michele | Open Market Purchase | 20.5.2026 | 3,098.324 | +3,098.324 | $6.46 |
| Wegener-Beyer Jessica Michele | Open Market Purchase | 20.5.2026 | 3,098 | +3,098 | $6.46 |
| Schmidt Michael Ryan | Open Market Purchase | 20.5.2026 | 7,100 | +7,100 | $6.98 |
| Brand Daniel Jordan | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 5,809,391 | -5,809,391 | — |
| Cynosure Group, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 12,042,712 | +12,042,712 | $5.35 |
| Viking Cake BR, LLC | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 5,809,391 | -5,809,391 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,584,862 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,298,501 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
65.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.1% 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