Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$1.89
▼ $0.01 (-0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/19 01:28 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$1.21B
Day Range
$1.86 - $1.95
52-Week Range
$1.66 - $4.14
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$1.78
Resistance
$2.47
CLVT is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-54.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/28 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $7.59 vs. price $1.89 (+301.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -8.2% (negative)
Fundamental
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
42
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 · $2.15
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 17 to 44 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
62
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
24
Risk
26
Sentiment
44
Fundamental
31
Institutional
40
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 **Clarivate Plc** has centered on its strategic shifts and internal activity. Notably, the company has expanded its use of **agentic AI** across its Cortellis platform to accelerate drug development, signaling a push into advanced analytics for pharmaceutical innovation. Additionally, insider trading reports highlighted executive share transactions, including purchases and sales totaling millions, while a Q2 2026 earnings call and discussions about AI-driven capabilities sparked investor speculation about Clarivate’s future direction. The focus remains on technological integration and market positioning.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Clarivate Plc. News trend score: 44. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are negative, versus 5 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
23
Fundamentals
31
Technical
24
Valuation
62
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-7%
Market Narrative
21
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
-20
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests CLVT’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, as the 16.1% three-month decline and muted volume imply investors are hesitant to crystallize losses. The **herding score (33)** hints at relative underperformance, but the lack of euphoria or overconfidence signals no aggressive buying pressure. The **narrative gap (-19)**—where reality (41) exceeds narrative (22)—may reflect underappreciated fundamentals, though momentum remains weak. The key question: *Will the stock’s valuation gap (-75% vs. DCF) attract value investors, or will loss aversion persist?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:07 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Clarivate Director Cornick buys 900,000 shares for $1.7M (Motley Fool, MT Newswires)"
"Citigroup lowers Clarivate price target to $2.5 (Benzinga)"
"Clarivate scales Agentic AI across Cortellis to advance drug development (PR Newswire)"
📈 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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those who see relative opportunity and those who flag significant risks in CLVT. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay’s crowd-behavior analysis and Samuel Nelson’s/Howard Marks’ cycle positioning—suggest the stock isn’t in a manic or overextended phase, implying a neutral-to-favorable backdrop. Meanwhile, Benjamin Graham’s defensive and enterprising frameworks offer mixed signals: the former finds it attractive, but the latter dismisses it as too shallow a bargain. Peter Lynch and Thorstein Veblen also hedge, noting growth potential but questioning whether it translates to sustainable value. Conversely, the lowest-scoring methods—from Jesse Livermore’s trend-following to Walter Bagehot’s liquidity concerns—paint a far bleaker picture, warning of volatility, capital risk, or structural weaknesses that would disqualify it outright. The divide reflects a tension between cyclical optimism and fundamental caution, with only a handful of methodologies finding any merit at all.
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 81
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 75
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 66
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 57
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 57
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 30
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
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)
🔴 30
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
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)
🔴 23
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 16
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)
🔴 13
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 13
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 10
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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 a downtrend (1 bullish · 8 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.
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
66.0%
Operating Margin
2.9%
Net Margin
-8.2%
EBITDA Margin
33.8%
ROE
-4.2%
ROA
-1.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.30
Cash
$329.20M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.84
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$1.89
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$7.59
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+301.5%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-2.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -2.6% | $355.71M | $326.34M |
| 2 | -1.3% | $350.92M | $295.37M |
| 3 | -0.1% | $350.70M | $270.81M |
| 4 | 1.2% | $354.98M | $251.47M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $363.85M | $236.48M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$365.30M
Terminal Value
$5.74B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$3.73B
Enterprise Value
$5.11B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$5.11B
*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
$7.19
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$7.03
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 9 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.9.2026
Motley Fool · 18.8.2026
MT Newswires · 10.8.2026
Motley Fool · 8.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 7.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 7.8.2026
MT Newswires · 6.8.2026
PR Newswire · 6.8.2026
Fintel · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
Moby · 29.7.2026
GuruFocus.com · 29.7.2026
MarketBeat · 29.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Clarivate Plc (CLVT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
CLVT currently scores 42/100 (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, CLVT's estimated fair value is $7.59, which is 301.5% above the current price of $1.89. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CLVT'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: Estimated fair value: $7.59 vs. price $1.89 (+301.5%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 68.7%; Net income growth: 68.4%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -8.2% (negative); ATR: 6.3% of price; Current ratio: 0.84.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CLVT.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 4 purchases and 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lisowski Matthew J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 67,357 | +67,357 | — |
| Easton Michael M | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 194,300 | +194,300 | — |
| Shem Tov Matitiahu S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.8.2026 | 47,633 | -47,633 | $1.96 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Open Market Purchase | 7.8.2026 | 250,000 | +250,000 | $1.85 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Open Market Purchase | 7.8.2026 | 2,000,000 | +250,000 | $1.85 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Open Market Purchase | 6.8.2026 | 650,000 | +650,000 | $1.86 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Open Market Purchase | 6.8.2026 | 1,750,000 | +650,000 | $1.86 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 2,002,242 | -2,002,242 | $1.94 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 310,702 | -310,702 | $1.94 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 176,674 | -176,674 | $1.94 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 10,178,764 | -310,702 | $1.94 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 3,856,597 | -176,674 | $1.94 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 6,819,742 | -2,002,242 | $1.94 |
| Bomba Jane L Okun | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 386 | -386 | $2.16 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 23,726 | +23,726 | $2.16 |
| Bomba Jane L Okun | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 13,310 | +13,310 | $2.16 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 13,310 | +13,310 | $2.16 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 1,513 | -1,513 | $2.16 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 2,662 | -2,662 | $2.16 |
| Bomba Jane L Okun | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 312,987 | +13,310 | $2.16 |
| Bomba Jane L Okun | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 312,601 | -386 | $2.16 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 294,429 | +23,726 | $2.16 |
| Snyder Andrew Miles | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 292,916 | -1,513 | $2.16 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 115,348 | +13,310 | $2.16 |
| Cornick Kenneth L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 112,686 | -2,662 | $2.16 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
49,512,211 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 52,785,550 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.3% 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