Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$4.15
▼ $0.38 (-8.4%)
Market data updated: 09/19 08:34 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$4.14 - $4.46
52-Week Range
$2.11 - $5.56
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$3.23
Resistance
$5.25
MSGM is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+48.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 20/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $14.83 vs. price $4.15 (+257.4%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 9.9% of price
Risk
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
as of 09/11/202669
This Week
76
7D Ago
↓ -7
Weakening
Technical
44
7D Ago: 84
↓ -40
Fundamental
83
7D Ago: 82
→ +1
Growth
82
7D Ago: 82
→ 0
Valuation
67
7D Ago: 67
→ 0
News
100
7D Ago: 80
↑ +20
Quality
63
7D Ago: 58
↑ +5
Risk
46
7D Ago: 40
↑ +6
Biggest Improvements
Biggest Declines
📊 Score History
69
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
1d ago · $4.24
Evidence: -7.1pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
1d ago · $4.29
Evidence: -5.9pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
1d ago · $4.29
Evidence: 22 insider open-market buy(s) in the last 30 days
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
1d ago · $4.29
Evidence: 8 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
9d ago · $5.20
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 67)
What happened after
14d ago · $4.58
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 8 to 64 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
⚖️ Base Case
69 / 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 10, 2026
Then
74
$5.20
Now
69
$4.15
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
82
Quality
63
Value
67
Momentum
44
Risk
46
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
83
Institutional
100
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 Motorsport Games Inc. (MSGM) has primarily focused on its strong financial performance in Q2 2026, with revenue surging by 74% alongside adjusted earnings growth, though earnings per share saw a decline. Insider activity drew attention when Red Oak Partners LLC, a major shareholder, disclosed a substantial $119K purchase of the company’s stock. Analysts compared MSGM favorably to other gaming stocks, highlighting its value proposition for investors. The focus remains on its financial health and strategic positioning in the gaming sector.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Motorsport Games Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
23
Fundamentals
83
Technical
44
Valuation
67
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+5%
Market Narrative
59
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for MSGM strongly suggests **FOMO dominance**, fueled by rapid price gains, elevated volume, and euphoric sentiment. The disconnect between momentum and fundamentals (e.g., +26.3% ROC vs. +2.5% EPS growth) hints at speculative overreach, while the 26-point narrative gap implies traders may be prioritizing short-term trends over fundamentals. Herding signals suggest peer underperformance could amplify participation, but the key question remains: *Will traders rationalize the valuation gap, or will momentum stall?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:59 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Revenue Surges 74% as..."
"2026-08-15. The following slide deck was published by Motorsport Games Inc."
"Red Oak Partners LLC, 10% Owner at Motorsport Games (NASDAQ:MSGM)."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 20D 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
Peter Lynch — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 38/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two starkly contrasting camps: the value-growth optimists and the cautious or skeptical observers. Peter Lynch, Philip Fisher, and Thorstein Veblen all rate it near the top (95–96), praising its growth potential, quality, and alignment with real value creation—suggesting a high-growth, durable business. Meanwhile, defensive investors like Benjamin Graham (74) and Jesse Livermore (73) see it as a reasonable play, though not a slam dunk, while Walter Bagehot (85) highlights its resilience. However, the divide sharpens with Howard Marks (57) and Charles Mackay (54), who flag overvaluation or speculative crowd behavior, while the efficient-market camp (45) and Morgan Housel (45) dismiss it as unexceptional. At the bottom, Samuel Armstrong Nelson (8) and Howard Marks’ late-cycle analysis (30) warn of overbought conditions or cyclical risks, framing it as a speculative bubble rather than a sound long-term hold.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 96
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 95
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 89
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 86
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 78
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 77
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 73
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 69
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 64
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
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 62
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 53
Moderate risk 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)
🟡 48
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 41
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 38
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
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 (3 bullish · 5 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.
Low 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
81.5%
Operating Margin
28.8%
Net Margin
61.3%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
102.3%
ROA
57.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.43
Cash
$4.99M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.25
Debt/Equity
0.00
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.15
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$14.83
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+257.4%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.6% | $4.37M | $4.01M |
| 2 | 6.3% | $4.64M | $3.91M |
| 3 | 5.0% | $4.88M | $3.77M |
| 4 | 3.8% | $5.06M | $3.59M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $5.19M | $3.37M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$4.06M
Terminal Value
$81.80M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$53.17M
Enterprise Value
$71.81M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$71.81M
*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
$1.17
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.52
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 8 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Zacks · 1.9.2026
Motley Fool · 21.8.2026
Benzinga · 20.8.2026
Benzinga · 17.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.8.2026
Moby · 15.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 15.8.2026
Motorsport Games Inc. (MSGM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 69/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
MSGM currently scores 69/100 (Moderate) 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, MSGM's estimated fair value is $14.83, which is 257.4% above the current price of $4.15. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MSGM's technical score is 44/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $14.83 vs. price $4.15 (+257.4%); Revenue growth (last year): 30.0%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 252.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 9.9% of price; Calmar: 0.03 (3y annualized return 2.2% / max drawdown 80.8%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for MSGM.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 25 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 743 | +743 | $3.95 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 1,406 | +1,406 | $3.95 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 344,776 | +2,979 | $3.93 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 184,435 | +1,575 | $3.93 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 1,575 | +1,575 | $3.93 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 2,979 | +2,979 | $3.93 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 182,860 | +1,497 | $3.91 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 341,797 | +2,831 | $3.91 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 1,497 | +1,497 | $3.91 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 2,831 | +2,831 | $3.91 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 338,966 | +2,146 | $3.90 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 181,363 | +1,134 | $3.90 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 2,146 | +2,146 | $3.90 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 1,134 | +1,134 | $3.90 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 180,229 | +1,802 | $3.67 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 336,820 | +3,410 | $3.67 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 3,410 | +3,410 | $3.67 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 1,802 | +1,802 | $3.67 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 20.8.2026 | 178,427 | +5,194 | $3.86 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 20.8.2026 | 333,410 | +17,949 | $3.86 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 20.8.2026 | 17,949 | +17,949 | $3.86 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 20.8.2026 | 5,194 | +5,194 | $3.86 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 18.8.2026 | 12,815 | +12,815 | $4.00 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 18.8.2026 | 6,894 | +6,894 | $4.00 |
| Red Oak Partners, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 17.8.2026 | 6,765 | +6,765 | $3.87 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
51,017 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 61,548 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
25.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.5% 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