Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$0.73
▼ $0.05 (-6.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:47 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$51.08M
Day Range
$0.73 - $0.81
52-Week Range
$0.67 - $4.71
Beta
—
Next Earnings
18.11.2026
Support
$0.67
Resistance
$1.19
NNOX is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
-82.4% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 2/13 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
MACD
MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 11.2% 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
🌱 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
49
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
32
Risk
34
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
75
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 **Nano-X Imaging Ltd.** has focused on its strategic expansion in the U.S. medical imaging market, particularly through distribution agreements to bolster adoption of its **Nanox.ARC** platform in **New England**, partnering with **Associated X-Ray Imaging Corp.**. The company has also been highlighted as an emerging player in integrated medical imaging technology, combining hardware, AI, and cloud-based solutions, while preparing to release its **second-quarter 2026 financial results** on September 9.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about NANO-X IMAGING LTD. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 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)
50
Psychology
99
Fundamentals
—
Technical
32
Valuation
—
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-56%
Market Narrative
56
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
NNOX’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, reflecting a market wary of further downside after a 42.6% drop over three months. Despite FOMO signals (momentum, volume, sentiment), the stock’s extreme underperformance dampens euphoric or herd-driven buying. The narrative gap (65 vs. 50) suggests optimism may outpace fundamentals, but the dominant state hints traders are cautious about locking in losses. The key question: *Will volume sustain or fade as traders weigh recent pain versus momentum?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:03 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Expands Nanox’s growing U.S. distribution network with a leading New England-based medical imaging provider"
"Nanox to report financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2026, before market open on Sept. 9, 2026"
"FDA-cleared AI applications, cloud software, radiology services and healthcare IT within an end-to-end platform"
"Entered into a sales reseller agreement for the commercialization of Nanox.AI Bone Solution in the United Kingdom"
📈 7D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 86/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for NNOX reflects deep methodological disagreements about what drives value. Thorstein Veblen’s high score suggests the stock aligns with his principle of growth tied to real economic utility, while Howard Marks (cycle-focused) sees it as mid-cycle—both implying potential upside, though from different angles. Meanwhile, Charles Mackay’s crowd-excitement warning and Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s overbought flag highlight a speculative bubble risk, contrasting sharply with Veblen’s and Marks’ more bullish readings. The cluster of mid-range scores (Jack Schwager’s neutrality, mixed Marks, and even Graham/Fisher/Lynch’s data gaps) underscores uncertainty, while the extreme lows (Loeb’s risk aversion, Housel’s volatility warning, and Smith’s lack of dividend data) signal outright caution—showing how divergent frameworks (value vs. momentum vs. behavioral) can paint the same stock as either a hidden gem or a speculative trap.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 86
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 80
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 78
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 58
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%
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%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 30
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 28
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 21
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
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
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Insider Monkey · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
NewMediaWire · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Motley Fool · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
InvestorsHub · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
MarketBeat · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 9.9.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for NANO-X IMAGING LTD (NNOX) — 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 NNOX 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.
NNOX's technical score is 32/100, 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: MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; CMF 20 days: 0.09.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 11.2% of price; Calmar: -0.55 (3y annualized return -52.4% / max drawdown 94.7%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for NNOX.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 12 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 21 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meltzer Erez | Open Market Purchase | 10.8.2026 | 9,443 | +9,443 | $1.03 |
| Meltzer Erez | Open Market Purchase | 10.8.2026 | 45,443 | +9,443 | $1.03 |
| Daniel Ran | Disposition to the Company | 4.8.2026 | 0 | +5,950 | $0.93 |
| Daniel Ran | Disposition to the Company | 29.7.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $0.89 |
| Daniel Ran | Disposition to the Company | 29.7.2026 | 5,950 | -1,000 | $0.89 |
| Kainan Noga | Open Market Purchase | 28.7.2026 | 33,000 | +33,000 | $0.90 |
| Kainan Noga | Open Market Purchase | 28.7.2026 | 40,792 | +33,000 | $0.90 |
| Meltzer Erez | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | $0.93 |
| Suesskind Dan S | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $0.94 |
| Suesskind Dan S | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $0.92 |
| Suesskind Dan S | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $0.94 |
| Suesskind Dan S | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 50,000 | +25,000 | $0.92 |
| Meltzer Erez | Open Market Purchase | 27.7.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | $0.93 |
| Alroy Erez | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 469 | -469 | $1.65 |
| Alroy Erez | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 209 | -209 | $1.65 |
| Alroy Erez | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 6,753 | -209 | $1.65 |
| Alroy Erez | Open Market Sale | 10.6.2026 | 17,075 | -469 | $1.65 |
| Daniel Ran | Disposition to the Company | 18.3.2026 | 39,474 | +39,474 | — |
| Daniel Ran | Disposition to the Company | 18.3.2026 | 46,424 | +39,474 | — |
| Daniel Ran | Open Market Purchase | 5.9.2025 | 1,000 | +1,000 | $3.65 |
| Daniel Ran | Open Market Purchase | 5.9.2025 | 6,950 | +1,000 | $3.65 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,460,705 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,679,505 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.0% 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