Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
237.30 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:05 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
237.20 ₪ - 242.50 ₪
52-Week Range
206.90 ₪ - 300.90 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
219.30 ₪
Resistance
245.50 ₪
+4.8% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 5/12 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 1.8% of price
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is below the 200-day average
Technical
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.
FIBI.TA demonstrates a **strong technical foundation** with a score of 85, driven by consistent bullish signals across multiple indicators. The stock sits firmly above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, signaling sustained upward momentum, while the MACD histogram and RSI (60.8) further confirm positive momentum. However, the %K value at 83.4 indicates an overbought condition, which could suggest near-term consolidation or a pullback. The **news category** scores a neutral 50 due to a lack of recent sentiment data, leaving market-driven factors unquantified. On the risk front, the **Calmar ratio of 0.60**—despite a robust 3-year annualized return of 17.4%—highlights a significant historical drawdown (29.2%), indicating volatility sensitivity. The ATR of 2.2% suggests moderate volatility relative to price, but the drawdown risk remains a key consideration for investors weighing long-term exposure.
The stock exhibits strong bullish momentum with price above both 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and an RSI of 60.8, though it is currently overbought (%K 83.4).
Technical strength signals sustained upward momentum, but overbought conditions may limit further short-term gains.
No recent news or sentiment data is available to assess market-driven factors or external catalysts.
Lack of news data leaves the stock’s performance dependent solely on technical and fundamental factors.
The stock shows a Calmar ratio of 0.60 (3-year return: 17.4%, max drawdown: 29.2%) and an ATR of 2.2%, indicating moderate volatility but significant historical drawdown risk.
High drawdowns suggest potential for sharp corrections, which could impact investor confidence or portfolio stability.
StockIQ conclusion
FIBI.TA presents a **technically strong profile** with clear bullish signals, supported by positive momentum and above-average returns over the past three years. However, concerns around overbought conditions, historical volatility, and a lack of news-driven catalysts temper its overall appeal. The stock’s risk-reward balance hinges on whether momentum sustains or if drawdown risks materialize. Investors should monitor technical levels and news developments closely to assess shifting dynamics.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
🐂🐻 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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
56
Risk
58
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING FIBI.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
2
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
—
Technical
56
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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, 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.
Price (3M)
+9%
Market Narrative
43
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-7
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixated on the 1.2% resistance gap, likely treating it as a near-term target or barrier. FOMO is present but muted, as momentum and volume remain modest, while herding is weak—participation is selective rather than broad. The narrative gap is nearly balanced, implying no stark disconnect between market perception and fundamentals. The key question is whether the resistance holds or if traders will break free from the anchor when tested.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 04:52 PM
What could change this?
📈 9D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 15/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a stark divide among methodologies, with some approaches leaning cautiously optimistic while others flag significant red flags. Charles Mackay’s high score (80) suggests no obvious crowd-driven mania, but Howard Marks (69) and Morgan Housel (61) temper enthusiasm, noting moderate risk and a non-trivial effort requirement. Meanwhile, the lack of definitive data for Graham, Fisher, Lynch, or Veblen—all scoring 50—reflects a fundamental uncertainty, while Nelson’s low score (11) warns of potential overvaluation in the market cycle. Schwager’s 25 further underscores a lack of technical or systematic setup, contrasting sharply with Smith’s 100, which assumes a speculative, data-deficient approach. The split between cautious pragmatism (Marks, Housel) and outright skepticism (Nelson, Schwager) highlights whether the stock’s risks are manageable or fundamentally mispriced.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 96
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 77
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 74
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 66
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 58
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Not enough growth/insider data for a real Veblen read
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 20
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 15
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
Based on the last 255 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 3 bearish · 3 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.
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 19.8.2026 | 556.346 ₪ |
| 27.5.2026 | 239.289 ₪ |
| 26.5.2026 | 239.289 ₪ |
| 23.3.2026 | 510.483 ₪ |
| 22.3.2026 | 510.483 ₪ |
| 24.11.2025 | 434.566 ₪ |
| 23.11.2025 | 434.566 ₪ |
| 18.8.2025 | 317.951 ₪ |
| 17.8.2025 | 317.951 ₪ |
| 22.5.2025 | 211.303 ₪ |
| 21.5.2025 | 211.303 ₪ |
| 19.3.2025 | 227.250 ₪ |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 0 positive, 0 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 0 articles.
No recent articles found for this stock.
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for First International Bank of Israel Ltd (FIBI.TA) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for FIBI.TA specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
FIBI.TA's technical score is 56/100, 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: ATR: 1.8% of price; Price is above the 50-day average; RSI 50.1 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; ROC 12 days: -1.1%.
Yes — FIBI.TA has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology