Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$98.98
▲ $1.04 (+1.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:50 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$405.59M
Day Range
$97.16 - $99.00
52-Week Range
$88.67 - $113.86
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$95.50
Resistance
$101.15
NATH is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-7.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/32 factors positiveRisk: Low
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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 1.1% of price
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $70.58 vs. price $98.98 (-28.7%)
Fair Value
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
51
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
34
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
59
Risk
70
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
62
Institutional
0
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 Nathan’s Famous, Inc. has primarily focused on its fiscal first-quarter (2027) and year-end financial results. The company reported a **10% revenue increase** to **$54.06 million** year-over-year, though earnings per share slightly declined from **$2.16 to $2.14**. Operational income remained stable, while speculation about **Smithfield Foods’ announced acquisition** of Nathan’s Famous emerged as a recurring theme. Earlier fourth-quarter results also highlighted year-end financial performance.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Nathan's Famous, Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 0 vs. 0 out of the last 7 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
56
Fundamentals
62
Technical
59
Valuation
38
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental 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.
Price (3M)
-3%
Market Narrative
58
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+21
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixated on the 1.5% support level, likely due to its proximity. Overconfidence (37) and euphoria (13) coexist but are muted by neutral sentiment and modest momentum. The narrative gap (20) hints at a disconnect between perceived and actual fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will break free from the support anchor or reinforce it with further consolidation.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 06:52 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"$54.062M in sales up from $46.998M YoY"
"Income from operations was $12,668,000 vs. $12,791,000 YoY"
"EPS $2.14 down from $2.16 YoY"
"Smithfield Foods announced acquisition of Nathan’s Famous"
📈 12D 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
Walter Bagehot — 90/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 12/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with scores ranging from a near-universal bullish signal (Walter Bagehot’s 90 and Gerald Loeb’s 88) to outright rejection (Thorstein Veblen’s 12). The high scorers—Bagehot, Loeb, and Mackay—focus on stability, liquidity, and the absence of speculative bubbles, suggesting it’s a resilient, low-risk holding. Meanwhile, the lower-end methodologies like Fisher, Veblen, and Livermore dismiss it as lacking growth potential, signaling overvaluation or misalignment with their core principles. Even Graham’s scores hover in the middle, indicating it doesn’t meet his strict valuation thresholds, while efficient-market theorists see no clear edge over passive investing. The contrast highlights a tension between defensive, liquidity-driven strategies and those prioritizing growth or trend-following discipline.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 90
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 87
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 77
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 70
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 68
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 66
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 47
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 31
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 24
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 18
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 13
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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 an uptrend (6 bullish · 3 bearish · 3 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$95.50
Range Bottom
$101.15
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
34.3%
Operating Margin
18.6%
Net Margin
12.4%
EBITDA Margin
19.1%
ROE
-140.8%
ROA
37.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.89
Cash
$24.40M
Total Debt
$48.14M
Current Ratio
2.49
Debt/Equity
-3.38
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 22.6.2026 | $0.500 |
| 21.6.2026 | $0.500 |
| 17.2.2026 | $0.500 |
| 16.2.2026 | $0.500 |
| 24.11.2025 | $3.000 |
| 23.11.2025 | $3.000 |
| 25.8.2025 | $0.500 |
| 24.8.2025 | $0.500 |
| 23.6.2025 | $0.500 |
| 22.6.2025 | $0.500 |
| 18.2.2025 | $0.500 |
| 17.2.2025 | $0.500 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$98.98
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$70.58
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-28.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
7.4%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.4% | $19.19M | $17.60M |
| 2 | 6.2% | $20.38M | $17.15M |
| 3 | 5.0% | $21.39M | $16.52M |
| 4 | 3.7% | $22.19M | $15.72M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $22.74M | $14.78M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$17.86M
Terminal Value
$358.59M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$233.06M
Enterprise Value
$314.83M
Net Debt
$23.74M
Equity Value
$291.09M
*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
-$3.45
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$3.56
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 0 positive, 7 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 7 articles.
Associated Press · 7.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 7.8.2026
Yahoo · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Associated Press · 9.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 9.6.2026
Nathan's Famous, Inc. (NATH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
NATH currently scores 51/100 (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, NATH's estimated fair value is $70.58, which is 28.7% below the current price of $98.98. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
NATH's technical score is 59/100, 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: ATR: 1.1% of price; Debt/equity: -3.38; Current ratio: 2.49.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $70.58 vs. price $98.98 (-28.7%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Return on equity (ROE): -140.8% (negative).
Yes — NATH has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 3 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Levine Andrew M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 11.6.2026 | 6,744 | -6,744 | $101.58 |
| Levine Andrew M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.6.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $68.50 |
| Levine Andrew M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.6.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | — |
| Levine Andrew M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.6.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $68.50 |
| Levine Andrew M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 11.6.2026 | 3,256 | -6,744 | $101.58 |
| Levine Andrew M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.6.2026 | 0 | -10,000 | — |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2025 | 10,000 | +10,000 | — |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.12.2025 | 5,105 | -5,105 | $89.87 |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2025 | 10,000 | -10,000 | — |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2025 | 724,626 | +10,000 | — |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.12.2025 | 719,521 | -5,105 | $89.87 |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2025 | 20,000 | -10,000 | — |
| PETROCELLI ATTILIO | Gift | 13.2.2025 | 21,707 | -21,707 | — |
| GENSON BRIAN S | Open Market Sale | 11.2.2025 | 900 | -900 | $87.00 |
| GENSON BRIAN S | Open Market Sale | 11.2.2025 | 100 | -100 | $87.45 |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.12.2024 | 5,105 | -5,105 | $85.60 |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2024 | 10,000 | +10,000 | — |
| LORBER HOWARD M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.12.2024 | 10,000 | -10,000 | — |
| GENSON BRIAN S | Open Market Sale | 14.11.2024 | 1,400 | -1,400 | $86.25 |
| LEISTNER BARRY | Gift | 26.8.2024 | 1,750 | -1,750 | — |
| PETROCELLI ATTILIO | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.8.2024 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| GENSON BRIAN S | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.8.2024 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| NORBITZ WAYNE | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.8.2024 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| EIDE ROBERT J | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.8.2024 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Levine Andrew M | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.8.2024 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
109,811 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 115,816 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 62.8% 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