Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Energy · ·
129.20 ₪
▲ 2.00 ₪ (+1.6%)
Market data updated: 09/17 12:20 PM
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
126.10 ₪ - 129.70 ₪
52-Week Range
⚠️ Data anomaly
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
NVPT.TA is a stock from the Energy sector — Oil, gas, and renewable energy — highly volatile profitability, dependent on global commodity prices.
+12297.7% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 3/13 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 34.42 (3y annualized return 661.3% / max drawdown 19.2%)
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
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.
NVPT.TA’s overall investor score of 47 reflects a mixed but cautiously optimistic outlook, with moderate technical signals tempered by recent negative momentum and a neutral-to-positive news environment. The technical category (score: 41) shows conflicting signals: while the stock remains above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages—a bullish indicator—momentum is weakening, as evidenced by a negative MACD histogram, an RSI of 48.7 (neutral/weak bias), and a recent 4.7% decline in the 12-day ROC. These factors suggest a potential downtrend, especially since the price is below the SAR (stop loss) point. However, the risk category (score: 58) highlights resilience, with a strong Calmar ratio of 36.27 (indicating high returns relative to drawdowns) and a manageable ATR of 3.5%, suggesting controlled volatility. Meanwhile, the news category (score: 56) leans positive, driven by AI-related optimism (e.g., Nvidia’s AI chip market momentum) and a single bullish headline, though most coverage remains neutral or unrelated to NVPT.TA itself. The interplay of these factors creates a nuanced picture: technical weakness is offset by long-term risk metrics and favorable thematic news, but the lack of directional clarity in technicals could dampen near-term confidence.
The stock sits above key moving averages (50-day and 200-day) but exhibits weakening momentum (negative MACD, RSI 48.7, and a 4.7% 12-day ROC decline), with the price below the SAR point indicating a downtrend.
Technical indicators are critical for short-term trading decisions, and the current signals suggest caution despite long-term bullish averages.
News coverage is predominantly neutral (e.g., AI/housing themes, unrelated corporate news) with one positive headline, but no direct bullish or bearish sentiment tied to NVPT.TA itself.
External news sentiment can influence investor perception, but its relevance to NVPT.TA is limited, making it a secondary factor in this analysis.
The stock demonstrates strong risk-adjusted returns (Calmar ratio: 36.27) with a contained volatility (ATR: 3.5%), indicating historical resilience despite recent technical weakness.
Risk metrics provide confidence in the stock’s ability to recover from drawdowns, counterbalancing short-term technical concerns.
StockIQ conclusion
NVPT.TA presents a balanced but cautious profile, with technical indicators showing short-term weakness despite long-term bullish averages and strong risk-adjusted returns. The news environment is neutral, lacking direct bullish catalysts, while risk metrics provide a foundation of stability. Investors should monitor momentum indicators closely, as their reversal could meaningfully alter the stock’s trajectory. The interplay of these factors suggests a stock that may require patience for a clearer directional signal, particularly if thematic or technical conditions improve.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
46
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
39
Risk
58
Sentiment
56
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 NVPT.TA...
The provided sources do not mention Navitas Petroleum LP at all, so no relevant media coverage or details about the company can be summarized based on these headlines.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Navitas Petroleum LP. News trend score: 56. Reason: 2 of the last 10 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
27
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
—
Technical
39
Valuation
—
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.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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)
+4%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is ambiguous, with no single dominant psychological state. The elevated valuation (+47.8% above 200-day average) and neutral RSI (49) suggest detached euphoria-like positioning, though negative momentum (-4.7% ROC) undermines that. Herding is present but directional—this stock lagged peers today, indicating selective underperformance rather than blind following. The narrative gap (-9) hints at a disconnect between market sentiment (optimistic) and technical reality (neutral/negative). The key question: is the stock’s outperformance anchored to past highs, or will it revert to mean?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 04:34 PM
📈 13D 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 — 75/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between technical and cyclical analysts on one end and fundamental or market-savvy investors on the other. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score (79) suggests the stock’s cycle position is favorably oversold, aligning with his momentum-driven approach, while Charles Mackay’s moderate score (61) hints at crowd-driven excitement—both leaning toward speculative optimism. In contrast, the majority of fundamental methodologies—from Graham to Fisher—return neutral scores (50) due to insufficient data, reflecting a consensus that traditional valuation or growth metrics aren’t yet definitive. Meanwhile, trend-following purists like Jesse Livermore (44) and Howard Marks’ late-cycle model (35) flag red flags, warning of potential overvaluation or market exhaustion, while Morgan Housel’s low score (15) underscores volatility risks that could deter patient long-term holders. The split underscores whether this stock’s appeal lies in technical timing or whether its fundamentals remain too murky for decisive action.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 75
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)
🟡 63
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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%
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 49
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 48
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)
🟡 47
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 36
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 24
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 14
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
Based on the last 253 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 6 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
121.50 ₪
Range Bottom
144.50 ₪
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 3.4.2026 | 394.063 ₪ |
| 2.4.2026 | 394.063 ₪ |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 2 positive, 7 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 10 articles.
Yahoo Finance Video · 29.8.2026
AFP · 29.8.2026
Yahoo Finance · 29.8.2026
Motley Fool · 29.8.2026
Motley Fool · 29.8.2026
The Tribune-Democrat, Johnstown, Pa. · 29.8.2026
BeInCrypto · 29.8.2026
Moneywise · 29.8.2026
Yahoo Personal Finance · 29.8.2026
AFP · 29.8.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Navitas Petroleum LP (NVPT.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 NVPT.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.
NVPT.TA's technical score is 39/100, 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: Calmar: 34.42 (3y annualized return 661.3% / max drawdown 19.2%); Price is above the 200-day average; +3.8% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend.
Yes — NVPT.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