Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Retail · ·
310.20 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 08:26 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
303.20 ₪ - 312.50 ₪
52-Week Range
245.00 ₪ - 404.40 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
272.00 ₪
Resistance
353.20 ₪
-2.9% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 5/13 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.17 (3y annualized return 6.2% / max drawdown 37.0%)
Risk
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.
FOX.TA exhibits a balanced yet nuanced profile, with its **investorScore of 73** and **STRONG rating** driven primarily by robust technical indicators. The stock demonstrates strong bullish momentum through its **SMA 50 crossing above SMA 200**, sustained price positioning above both the 50-day and 200-day averages, and a **positive MACD histogram**, all of which signal favorable short-to-medium-term trends. However, the **RSI (79.4) and %K (95.9) readings** indicate the stock is nearing overbought levels, raising potential concerns about imminent pullbacks. Additionally, the **declining volume** despite the price advance suggests weakening institutional or retail interest, which could signal a lack of conviction in the current rally. These technical strengths are partially offset by **moderate risk metrics**, particularly the **Calmar ratio of 0.25**, reflecting a historically high drawdown (37.0%) relative to its 3-year annualized return (9.3%), which underscores volatility sensitivity. The **news category’s neutral score (50)** further highlights a lack of material external catalysts, leaving the stock’s trajectory reliant on internal technical dynamics rather than broader market or company-specific developments.
The stock shows strong bullish momentum with the SMA 50 crossing above SMA 200, sustained price above both 50-day and 200-day averages, and a positive MACD histogram. However, the RSI (79.4) and %K (95.9) indicate overbought conditions, and volume is declining despite the price advance.
Technical strength signals potential for continued upward movement, but overbought conditions and declining volume may signal impending volatility or a pullback.
There is no available evidence or news data provided to evaluate the stock’s external narrative or company-specific developments.
Lack of news data means the stock’s performance is driven purely by technical factors, leaving it vulnerable to external shocks or news-driven volatility.
The stock exhibits a **Calmar ratio of 0.25**, indicating high volatility with a 37.0% max drawdown over a 3-year period, despite a 9.3% annualized return. The ATR (3.3% of price) suggests moderate volatility.
The high drawdown relative to returns signals that while the stock may offer gains, it carries significant risk of sharp declines, particularly in adverse market conditions.
StockIQ conclusion
FOX.TA presents a mixed but technically favorable profile, with strong short-term momentum supported by key moving average crossovers and positive momentum indicators. However, overbought conditions, declining volume, and elevated volatility risk create potential headwinds. The stock’s performance hinges on internal technical dynamics rather than external catalysts, making it sensitive to shifts in market sentiment or participation. Investors should monitor volume trends and RSI readings closely, as these could signal either continued strength or an impending pullback. The lack of news data further emphasizes the stock’s reliance on technical factors, underscoring the importance of risk management in this volatile environment.
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
51
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
53
Risk
42
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 FOX.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
—
Technical
53
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
34
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-16
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests traders are fixated on the near-term resistance level (0.9% away), consistent with anchoring bias. While momentum (+23.9% ROC) and overbought conditions (RSI 79) fuel FOMO and euphoria, the lack of extreme volume or volatility rules out panic. The key question is whether traders will break resistance or retreat to the anchor—both require a narrative shift beyond current momentum. Herding remains muted, implying no herd mentality is driving moves.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 03:56 AM
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 — 95/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 30/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a stark contrast between methodologies, with only Jesse Livermore’s technical approach offering a clear bullish signal (score: 80) based on favorable price trends, while the rest either lack sufficient data or raise significant red flags. Howard Marks’ cautious mixed verdict (57) suggests the business may be solid but overpriced, aligning with the efficient-market skeptics (Bogle/Malkiel, 43) who see little evidence of a stock-specific edge. Meanwhile, the most bearish voices—like Samuel Armstrong Nelson (1) and Morgan Housel (24)—warn of overbought conditions or volatility that could erode patient investors’ discipline, mirroring Gerald Loeb’s risk-averse stance (39). The lack of definitive fundamentals data for Graham, Fisher, or Lynch leaves their frameworks unable to form a verdict, while Bagehot and Veblen’s neutral scores (50) reflect insufficient balance-sheet or insider signals to justify a decisive position.
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)
🟢 95
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)
🟢 86
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)
🟢 66
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
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
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%
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 41
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 32
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)
🔴 30
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 30
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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 (5 bullish · 6 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.9.2026 | 1,078.706 ₪ |
| 11.9.2025 | 243.753 ₪ |
| 10.9.2025 | 243.753 ₪ |
| 3.3.2025 | 1,083.514 ₪ |
| 2.3.2025 | 1,083.514 ₪ |
| 11.9.2024 | 445.022 ₪ |
| 10.9.2024 | 445.022 ₪ |
| 14.4.2024 | 362.082 ₪ |
| 13.4.2024 | 362.082 ₪ |
| 11.9.2023 | 254.098 ₪ |
| 10.9.2023 | 254.098 ₪ |
| 16.4.2023 | 635.776 ₪ |
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 Fox Wizel Ltd (FOX.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 FOX.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.
FOX.TA's technical score is 53/100, 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; +3.8% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.17 (3y annualized return 6.2% / max drawdown 37.0%); MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend.
Yes — FOX.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