Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$85.09
▲ $4.64 (+5.8%)
Market data updated: 09/18 07:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$81.51 - $85.95
52-Week Range
$49.90 - $159.47
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
-35.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/27 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 63.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -3.5% (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
43
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
3d ago · $90.60
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 29 to -2 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
14d ago · $103.23
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 29 to 56 day-over-day
What happened after
14d ago · $103.23
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 65)
What happened after
14d ago · $103.23
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 42 to 70 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
42
Value
50
Momentum
43
Risk
34
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
26
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 Circle Internet Group (CRCL) has centered on its strategic acquisitions—including a $400 million purchase of cross-border payment infrastructure and the $100 million acquisition of Singapore-based Tazapay—highlighting its push to expand payment rails. The company also gained attention for its high-profile partnership with Chelsea Football Club, securing a shirt sponsorship deal for the 2026/27 season. Additionally, investor interest surged amid speculation about its bank charter, Arc mainnet launch, and strong stock performance, with Cathie Wood’s recent purchases further fueling speculation. Analysts remain cautiously optimistic, though crypto-linked equities saw a dip following Bitcoin’s price rejection.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Circle Internet Group, Inc.. News trend score: 56. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
21
Fundamentals
26
Technical
43
Valuation
50
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)
+6%
Market Narrative
31
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
-5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant FOMO (score 52) reflects a blend of momentum-driven excitement and extreme positive sentiment, despite moderate volume. Euphoria (39) and overconfidence (38) emerge as secondary biases, likely amplifying perceived value above fundamentals. The wide narrative-reality gap (49) hints at detached optimism, but the key question remains: *Will momentum sustain or collapse under valuation pressures?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:48 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Circle Internet Group (CRCL) is seeing a surge in its stock price alongside higher demand for its USDC stablecoin as Bitcoin trades near record highs."
"Chelsea Football Club’s new partnership with Circle Internet Group (CRCL) will put the stablecoin issuer on the front of one of football’s most watched shirts."
"Market attention is shifting to the upcoming launch of Circle's Arc mainnet, a proprietary blockchain platform focused on institutional asset tokenization."
"Circle Is Buying Its Own Cross-Border Payment Rails for $400 Million – and Skipping the ‘Build’ Phase Entirely"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 13D 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 — 94/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 10/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with some seeing clear opportunities while others flag serious red flags. Jesse Livermore’s high score (81) suggests the stock exhibits the aggressive, momentum-driven price action he favored, while Philip Fisher’s moderate approval (60) hints at solid fundamentals—though not exceptional enough for his long-term standards. In contrast, the majority of investors—from Peter Lynch (35) to Benjamin Graham (4)—either dismiss it outright or see it as risky, with Graham’s near-zero score indicating a failure of defensive metrics. The middle ground, represented by Howard Marks (40) and Morgan Housel (45), acknowledges potential but warns of overvaluation or cyclical risks, while the lowest scorers—like Walter Bagehot (17) and Gerald Loeb (18)—highlight liquidity and capital-preservation concerns. The stark contrast between Livermore’s enthusiasm and Graham’s rejection underscores how the same stock can fit into wildly different investment philosophies.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 94
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)
🟢 80
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 60
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 35
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 34
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 34
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 18
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)
🔴 17
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 14
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 10
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 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 6 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
—
Operating Margin
-3.5%
Net Margin
-2.5%
EBITDA Margin
-0.7%
ROE
-2.1%
ROA
-0.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.44
Cash
$1.53B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.03
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$85.09
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$85.17
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+0.1%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $662.12M | $607.45M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $790.41M | $665.27M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $899.09M | $694.26M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $972.14M | $688.69M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $996.44M | $647.62M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$529.70M
Terminal Value
$15.71B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$10.21B
Enterprise Value
$13.52B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$13.52B
*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
$20.98
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$16.71
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 9 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Circle Internet Group, Inc. (CRCL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, 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.
CRCL currently scores 43/100 (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, CRCL's estimated fair value is $85.17, which is 0.1% above the current price of $85.09. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CRCL's technical score is 43/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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): 63.9%; Free cash flow growth: 62.3%; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -3.5% (negative); Net margin: -2.5% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CRCL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 25 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 404 | -404 | $97.68 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 595 | -595 | $98.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 36 | -36 | $100.34 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 185 | -185 | $99.40 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 184 | -184 | $99.40 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 36 | -36 | $100.34 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 297 | -297 | $96.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 184 | -184 | $99.40 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 296 | -296 | $96.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 296 | -296 | $96.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 6,843 | -6,843 | $99.40 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 403 | -403 | $97.68 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 36 | -36 | $100.34 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 404 | -404 | $97.68 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 595 | -595 | $98.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 1,326 | -1,326 | $100.34 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 185 | -185 | $99.40 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 404 | -404 | $97.68 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 596 | -596 | $98.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 596 | -596 | $98.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 22,073 | -22,073 | $98.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 297 | -297 | $96.50 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 35 | -35 | $100.34 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 14,967 | -14,967 | $97.68 |
| Allaire Jeremy | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 10,991 | -10,991 | $96.50 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
20,596,643 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 24,410,272 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 44.8% 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