Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
239.60 ₪
▼ 0.80 ₪ (-0.3%)
Market data updated: 09/18 06:10 PM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
238.80 ₪ - 243.80 ₪
52-Week Range
191.60 ₪ - 260.70 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+16.4% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 9/13 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
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 1.9% of price
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.
MZTF.TA exhibits a **strong overall investor score of 72**, driven primarily by robust technical indicators and moderate risk metrics, though news sentiment remains neutral. The technical category scores exceptionally high at **83**, reflecting a clear upward bias with the stock trading above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, alongside a positive MACD histogram and RSI of 64.2—signaling healthy momentum. However, the overbought %K reading (88.6) suggests potential short-term exhaustion, while the declining volume despite price gains hints at weakening conviction among traders. Risk metrics are moderately favorable, with a low ATR (1.9% of price) indicating stable volatility and a Calmar ratio of 1.00, though the 3-year annualized return (25.2%) is offset by an equal max drawdown, signaling volatility sensitivity. The lack of news data (score: 50) leaves no external context, but the technical strength and controlled risk profile provide a balanced foundation for cautious optimism.
The stock trades above both 50-day and 200-day moving averages, with a positive MACD histogram and RSI of 64.2 indicating strong momentum, though %K at 88.6 suggests overbought conditions.
These technical signals are critical for assessing short-to-medium-term price trends and potential reversal points.
No news data or sentiment evidence is available for MZTF.TA, resulting in a neutral score of 50.
News sentiment often influences market perception and volatility, so its absence limits broader context.
The ATR (1.9% of price) indicates low volatility, but the Calmar ratio of 1.00 reflects a 3-year annualized return (25.2%) matched by an equal max drawdown (25.2%), signaling volatility risk.
This balance of return and drawdown highlights potential sensitivity to market downturns despite strong historical gains.
StockIQ conclusion
MZTF.TA demonstrates a **strong technical foundation** with clear upward momentum, supported by stable volatility metrics and a balanced risk-reward profile. However, overbought conditions and declining volume introduce caution, while the lack of news data removes external context. The stock’s strength lies in its technical resilience, but investors should monitor volume trends and potential overbought corrections. Without additional news or fundamental insights, the current data suggests a **moderately favorable but cautious outlook**.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
as of 09/10/202668
This Week
72
7D Ago
↓ -4
Weakening
Technical
77
7D Ago: 85
↓ -8
News
50
7D Ago: 50
→ 0
Risk
58
7D Ago: 50
↑ +8
Biggest Improvements
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 10, 2026
Then
72
$235.70
Now
68
$239.60
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 MZTF.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
65
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+23%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-3
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is dominated by anchoring, as the stock’s proximity to resistance (0.8%) creates a psychological barrier. This suggests traders are fixating on this level, possibly waiting for confirmation before acting. FOMO is present but muted, with moderate momentum and neutral sentiment preventing urgency. The narrative-reality gap is narrow (-2), indicating no major disconnect between market perception and fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will break resistance or retreat, given the thin margin for anchoring to hold.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 11:08 PM
What could change this?
📈 8D 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 — 80/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 17/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some investors seeing cautious opportunity while others flag outright risks. The highest scores come from **Edgar Lawrence Smith** (100) and **Charles Mackay** (75), where Smith’s lack of dividend/growth data leaves his model neutral, while Mackay’s low crowd-mania score suggests it hasn’t yet become a speculative frenzy. Meanwhile, **Howard Marks** (70) and **Morgan Housel** (70) lean positive, with Marks seeing reasonable risk pricing and Housel praising it as a quiet, patient-friendly compounder—though both rely on incomplete data. On the other end, **Jesse Livermore** (52) and **Samuel Armstrong Nelson** (7) dismiss it outright, with Livermore spotting no clear trend and Nelson warning of an overbought cycle. The middle ground—**Gerald Loeb** (64) and **Howard Marks (Market Cycle)** (51)—cautions about moderate risk and mid-cycle positioning, while the rest—from **Graham** to **Schwager**—lack sufficient data to form a definitive verdict, leaving the stock’s true merit ambiguous.
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)
🟢 80
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 72
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 71
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 65
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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%
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 42
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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)
🔴 21
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 17
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 254 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 1 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 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 |
|---|---|
| 24.8.2026 | 274.119 ₪ |
| 28.5.2026 | 237.993 ₪ |
| 27.5.2026 | 237.993 ₪ |
| 9.3.2026 | 270.035 ₪ |
| 8.3.2026 | 270.035 ₪ |
| 25.11.2025 | 285.244 ₪ |
| 24.11.2025 | 285.244 ₪ |
| 21.8.2025 | 279.485 ₪ |
| 20.8.2025 | 279.485 ₪ |
| 28.5.2025 | 198.971 ₪ |
| 27.5.2025 | 198.971 ₪ |
| 6.3.2025 | 201.569 ₪ |
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 Mizrahi Tefahot Bank Ltd (MZTF.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 MZTF.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.
MZTF.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: ATR: 1.9% of price; 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.
Yes — MZTF.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