Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
15.03 ₪
▲ 0.88 ₪ (+6.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 08:55 AM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
14.37 ₪ - 15.12 ₪
52-Week Range
12.77 ₪ - 25.90 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
ISCN.TA is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-5.4% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 2/12 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
ROC (rate of change)
ROC 12 days: 0.3%
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.3% of price
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.
ISCN.TA exhibits a **moderate overall score of 62**, reflecting a mixed technical outlook tempered by elevated risk metrics and limited news-driven momentum. The technical category (72) is the strongest, driven by positive momentum indicators—such as the MACD histogram, RSI, and ADX—suggesting an active uptrend supported by price action above the 50-day average and Parabolic SAR. However, the stock’s position below the 200-day average and overbought %K (98.3) introduce caution, signaling potential short-term exhaustion. Risk (34) is the weakest category, with a **Calmar ratio of 0.50**—indicating high volatility relative to returns—and a **47.0% max drawdown** over three years, despite a 23.4% annualized return. The news category (50) lacks quantifiable evidence, leaving sentiment analysis ambiguous. Together, these factors create a nuanced picture: while technicals suggest resilience, volatility and structural risk dampen confidence, and the absence of news-driven catalysts leaves performance vulnerable to external shifts.
The stock shows strong short-term momentum (MACD, RSI, ADX) and an uptrend (price above 50-day average, SAR below price), but it is overbought (%K 98.3) and remains below its 200-day average, indicating potential medium-term resistance.
Short-term momentum is critical for sustaining upward trends, but overbought conditions and long-term averages signal potential reversals or consolidation.
No recent news or qualitative evidence is provided to assess sentiment, market perception, or external catalysts affecting the stock.
Lack of news data means the stock’s performance is driven purely by technicals and fundamentals, leaving it exposed to unexpected news-driven volatility.
The stock exhibits high volatility (ATR 4.4% of price) and a historically severe drawdown (47.0%), despite a strong annualized return (23.4%), resulting in a low Calmar ratio (0.50).
High volatility and drawdown risk suggest the stock may experience significant price swings, making it less stable for risk-averse investors.
StockIQ conclusion
ISCN.TA demonstrates **moderate strength in short-term technicals**, with clear momentum indicators supporting an active uptrend, but its **high volatility and structural risk**—evidenced by a poor Calmar ratio and severe historical drawdowns—create significant concerns. The lack of news-driven catalysts further limits visibility, leaving the stock’s trajectory dependent on technical resilience alone. While the current setup offers opportunities for traders focused on momentum, the underlying volatility and medium-term bearish signals (e.g., price below the 200-day average) necessitate caution. Investors should monitor for confirmation of the uptrend or external catalysts to validate the stock’s medium-term potential.
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
36
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
14d ago · $15.45
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 6 to 46 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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
30
Risk
34
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 ISCN.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
4
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
56
Fundamentals
—
Technical
30
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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)
-20%
Market Narrative
44
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-6
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a dominant **herding tendency** as traders align with peer underperformance, avoiding relative lag. The 3-month decline and subdued volume also indicate **loss aversion**, where investors hesitate to exit despite neutral momentum. FOMO remains secondary due to muted volume and sentiment, while euphoria is dampened by the stock’s underperformance relative to its 200-day baseline. The key question is whether the narrative gap (6-point divergence) will prompt re-evaluation or if traders will continue to follow the herd’s cautious path.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:13 PM
What could change this?
📈 6D 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 — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies due to the stark contrast between cautious optimism and outright skepticism. On one end, **Edgar Lawrence Smith** and **Charles Mackay** lean favorably, with Smith’s score capped at 100 for lack of dividend/growth data (implying potential if data were available) and Mackay’s 86 suggesting no obvious speculative frenzy. Meanwhile, **Howard Marks** (both cycle and general approaches) scores mid-range (81 and 70), signaling a balanced view—early-to-mid cycle without clear overvaluation. However, the majority of frameworks—including **Graham, Fisher, Lynch, and Veblen**—all hit 50 due to insufficient data, creating a neutral deadlock. At the other extreme, **Loeb, Nelson, and Housel** deliver harsh verdicts (21, 20, and 0), flagging excessive risk, overbought conditions, or volatility that would test even the most patient investors. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s ambiguity (or lack of data) warrants cautious curiosity or outright avoidance.
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)
🟢 99
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 93
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 73
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)
🟢 70
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
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
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)
🔴 26
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 23
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 20
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)
🔴 0
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 253 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 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 downtrend 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 |
|---|---|
| 31.3.2026 | 7.329 ₪ |
| 30.3.2026 | 7.329 ₪ |
| 2.4.2025 | 7.555 ₪ |
| 1.4.2025 | 7.555 ₪ |
| 3.4.2024 | 7.750 ₪ |
| 2.4.2024 | 7.750 ₪ |
| 30.3.2023 | 8.262 ₪ |
| 29.3.2023 | 8.262 ₪ |
| 27.3.2022 | 12.320 ₪ |
| 26.3.2022 | 12.320 ₪ |
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 Israel Canada Ltd (ISCN.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 ISCN.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.
ISCN.TA's technical score is 30/100, 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: ROC 12 days: 0.3%; CMF 20 days: 0.08.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.3% of price; Calmar: 0.34 (3y annualized return 16.1% / max drawdown 47.0%); Price is below the 50-day average.
Yes — ISCN.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