Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$10.74
▼ $0.60 (-5.3%)
Market data updated: 09/19 11:51 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$3.20B
Day Range
$10.68 - $11.26
52-Week Range
$5.88 - $16.70
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$10.68
Resistance
$14.55
LION is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+50.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 51.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$5.07 vs. price $10.74 (-147.2%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (76/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
44
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
76
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
23
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
34
Institutional
64
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 Lionsgate Studios has centered on **activist investor pressure** pushing the company to consider a sale, particularly amid industry shifts like AI advancements. Analysts, including B. Riley Securities, have maintained a neutral stance while lowering its price target to $16, reflecting market skepticism. The focus also includes broader industry trends, such as Lionsgate’s position in potential acquisition discussions—though no concrete deals have been confirmed. Earnings call transcripts and sector-wide stock declines further highlight investor uncertainty.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Lionsgate Studios Corp Common. News trend score: 74. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
89
Fundamentals
34
Technical
23
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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)
-31%
Market Narrative
51
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for LION suggests traders are fixated on near-term support (1.7% proximity) while grappling with recent losses (-18.5% over three months). The dominance of anchoring (66) alongside loss aversion (61) implies traders may be reluctant to sell further but also hesitant to buy without clearer momentum. The narrative gap (9 points) hints at a disconnect between market sentiment and fundamentals, though no clear bias toward aggressive action is evident. The key question remains whether the stock will hold support or if traders will accelerate loss mitigation.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:01 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Lionsgate Facing Activist Pressure to Put Itself Up for Sale"
"Lionsgate's recent success has been driven by the movie studio, fueled by hits like Michael and The Housemaid"
"B. Riley Securities analyst lowers Lionsgate Studios price target from $17 to $16"
📈 11D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 25/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates a wide spread of scores for LION, ranging from 82 down to 0. Investors who focus on crowd‑mania avoidance, favorable cycle position, and real value creation such as Mackay, Nelson, Veblen, Marks (cycle) and Housel assign relatively high scores, indicating they view the stock as a potentially solid quiet compounder. In contrast, frameworks that emphasize strict intrinsic‑value margins, liquidity risk, or clear price trends—Graham, the efficient‑market view, Livermore, Loeb, Fisher and Bagehot—produce middling to low scores, reflecting doubts about valuation, liquidity and trend strength. This divergence arises because each methodology weighs different factors, leading to a generally positive but far from unanimous assessment of LION.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
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)
🟢 80
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 77
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 67
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 66
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 62
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 61
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 40
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 35
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 25
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 bearish · 1 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.
Gross Margin
—
Operating Margin
3.7%
Net Margin
-7.5%
EBITDA Margin
4.4%
ROE
16.6%
ROA
-3.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.70
Cash
$341.50M
Total Debt
$1.94B
Current Ratio
0.49
Debt/Equity
-1.63
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$10.74
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$5.07
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-147.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-4.4%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -4.4% | $10.90M | $10.00M |
| 2 | -2.7% | $10.60M | $8.93M |
| 3 | -1.0% | $10.50M | $8.11M |
| 4 | 0.8% | $10.58M | $7.50M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $10.85M | $7.05M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$11.40M
Terminal Value
$171.08M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$111.19M
Enterprise Value
$152.77M
Net Debt
$1.60B
Equity Value
$-1.45B
*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
-$4.18
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$7.24
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 3.9.2026
Barrons.com · 14.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
MT Newswires · 11.8.2026
MT Newswires · 11.8.2026
MT Newswires · 11.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
Benzinga · 10.8.2026
MT Newswires · 10.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.8.2026
MarketBeat · 8.8.2026
Moby · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Lionsgate Studios Corp Common (LION) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 44/100, 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.
LION currently scores 44/100 (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, LION's estimated fair value is -$5.07, which is 147.2% below the current price of $10.74. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
LION's technical score is 23/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 51.0%; Free cash flow growth: 106.4%; Net income growth: 45.2%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$5.07 vs. price $10.74 (-147.2%); Net margin: -7.5% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for LION.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 14 purchases and 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 15,804,919 | +15,804,919 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 11,755,412 | -11,755,412 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 11,755,412 | +11,755,412 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 797,526 | +797,526 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 1,469,450 | -1,469,450 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 11,154,680 | +11,154,680 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 25,173,882 | -25,173,882 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 1,916,271 | +1,916,271 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 3,701,988 | -3,701,988 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 671,924 | +671,924 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 499,765 | +499,765 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 499,765 | -499,765 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 0 | -25,173,882 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 797,526 | +797,526 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 1,916,271 | +1,916,271 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 11,154,680 | +11,154,680 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 671,924 | +671,924 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 172,159 | -499,765 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 499,765 | +499,765 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 15,804,919 | +15,804,919 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Sale | 8.7.2026 | 4,049,507 | -11,755,412 | — |
| RACHESKY MARK H MD | Open Market Purchase | 8.7.2026 | 11,755,412 | +11,755,412 | — |
| FELTHEIMER JON | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 196,902 | +196,902 | — |
| FELTHEIMER JON | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 103,669 | -103,669 | $14.66 |
| Goldsmith Brian | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 35,064 | -35,064 | $14.66 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,158,361 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 15,490,760 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
38.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 34.9% 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