Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Insurance · ·
200.00 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:10 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
198.10 ₪ - 203.00 ₪
52-Week Range
93.51 ₪ - 209.30 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
157.20 ₪
Resistance
203.00 ₪
+95.1% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 10/14 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 3.76 (3y annualized return 90.1% / max drawdown 23.9%)
Risk
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
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.
HARL.TA exhibits a **strong overall investor score of 73**, driven primarily by robust technical performance and moderate risk management, though its news sentiment remains neutral. The technical category scores an impressive **85**, reflecting a clear upward trend with the stock trading above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, alongside a positive MACD histogram indicating rising momentum. While the RSI (72.3) and %K (93.8) suggest overbought conditions—potentially signaling a near-term pullback—the broader trend remains bullish. Risk metrics are balanced, with a **Calmar ratio of 3.89** (indicating strong risk-adjusted returns) and a manageable **23.9% max drawdown** over three years, though the ATR (2.9%) suggests moderate volatility. The news category’s **50 score** reflects a lack of recent material developments, leaving the stock’s trajectory reliant on technical momentum rather than external catalysts.
The stock shows strong bullish momentum with prices above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and a 18.9% outperformance over the last three months. However, technical indicators like RSI (72.3) and %K (93.8) indicate overbought conditions, which may signal a short-term correction.
Technical strength underpins investor confidence, but overbought signals could trigger volatility or consolidation if not addressed.
There are no recent news-driven developments or analyst commentary provided in the data, resulting in a neutral news sentiment score of 50.
Lack of news activity means the stock’s performance hinges entirely on technical and fundamental factors rather than external narratives.
The stock demonstrates a strong risk-adjusted return with a **Calmar ratio of 3.89** (93.1% annualized return over three years) and a **23.9% max drawdown**, while the ATR (2.9%) indicates moderate volatility. These metrics suggest resilience but also highlight potential downside risk during drawdown periods.
A high Calmar ratio signals strong risk management, but the max drawdown remains a key risk factor for investors seeking stability.
StockIQ conclusion
HARL.TA presents a **balanced profile** with strong technical indicators and risk-adjusted returns, supported by recent outperformance. However, overbought conditions and a lack of news-driven catalysts introduce caution. The stock’s resilience is evident in its Calmar ratio and momentum, but investors should monitor for potential pullbacks or external catalysts to sustain its upward trajectory. Without additional data on qualitative factors, the analysis remains grounded in deterministic technical and risk metrics.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
as of 09/11/202668
This Week
75
7D Ago
↓ -7
Weakening
Technical
77
7D Ago: 89
↓ -12
News
50
7D Ago: 50
→ 0
Risk
58
7D Ago: 58
→ 0
Biggest Declines
📊 Score History
68
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
⚖️ Base Case
68 / 100
🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of September 11, 2026
Then
75
$192.70
Now
68
$200.00
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 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
77
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 HARL.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
70
Fundamentals
—
Technical
77
Valuation
—
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+25%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-3
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **Anchoring** (80) reflects traders fixating on the 1.0% resistance gap, while **FOMO** (48) and **Herding** (49) indicate momentum-driven participation. The narrow **narrative gap** (5) suggests no extreme disconnect between sentiment and fundamentals. Key tension: **Euphoria** (22) hints at speculative energy, but the lack of **Overconfidence** or **Loss Aversion** implies caution remains. The open question: Will traders break resistance or retreat if momentum stalls?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 07:25 PM
What could change this?
📈 14D 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 — 64/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast between methodologies here reveals a deep divide between momentum-driven and fundamental approaches. Jesse Livermore’s high score reflects his focus on price trends, where the stock’s upward movement aligns with his criteria, while Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-zero score flags it as overbought in a cyclical context. Meanwhile, Howard Marks and Gerald M. Loeb offer cautious optimism—Marks sees reasonable risk pricing, while Loeb acknowledges moderate capital risk—but their scores pale compared to Livermore’s enthusiasm. The crowd psychology of Charles Mackay (62) hints at speculative excitement, further complicating the picture, while Jack Schwager’s neutral stance suggests no decisive edge. The lack of definitive data for Graham, Fisher, or Lynch underscores the stock’s murky fundamentals, leaving only passive or index-based strategies (like Malkiel/Bogle’s 39) as viable alternatives. The debate ultimately hinges on whether to chase price momentum (Livermore) or brace for volatility (Housel) in a stock that lacks clear fundamental or cyclical justification.
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)
🟡 64
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟡 63
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 58
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 57
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 56
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 51
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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
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%
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 47
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 9
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 255 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 3 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.
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 |
|---|---|
| 3.9.2026 | 195.000 ₪ |
| 29.6.2026 | 243.000 ₪ |
| 28.6.2026 | 243.000 ₪ |
| 9.4.2026 | 258.000 ₪ |
| 8.4.2026 | 258.000 ₪ |
| 7.9.2025 | 194.000 ₪ |
| 6.9.2025 | 194.000 ₪ |
| 31.12.2024 | 121.207 ₪ |
| 30.12.2024 | 121.207 ₪ |
| 19.9.2024 | 97.343 ₪ |
| 18.9.2024 | 97.343 ₪ |
| 8.4.2024 | 168.992 ₪ |
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 Harel Insurance Investments & Financial Services Ltd (HARL.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 HARL.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.
HARL.TA's technical score is 77/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Calmar: 3.76 (3y annualized return 90.1% / max drawdown 23.9%); Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; %K 81.4 — overbought; Volume is falling despite the price advance — possible weakening.
Yes — HARL.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