Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
297.40 ₪
▲ 15.20 ₪ (+5.4%)
Market data updated: 09/18 08:21 AM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
290.00 ₪ - 300.50 ₪
52-Week Range
179.50 ₪ - 366.70 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
PRTC.TA is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+77.3% (1Y)
🔴 Weak
Strengths: 2/12 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is above the 200-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.7% of price
Risk
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.
PRTC.TA exhibits a **moderate overall score of 48**, reflecting a mixed technical and risk profile with limited news-driven insights. The stock’s technical indicators show **contradictory signals**: while the **MACD histogram (positive) and RSI (52.2) suggest upward momentum**, the **price remains below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages**, signaling longer-term weakness. The **Parabolic SAR (below price) confirms a downtrend**, though the **12-day ROC (5.8%) and recent 3-month outperformance (+4.3% vs. index) highlight short-term resilience**. Risk metrics are notably concerning, with a **high Calmar ratio (0.79) indicating volatility sensitivity**—a 3-year annualized return of 37.5% is offset by a **47.5% max drawdown**, and the **ATR (5.0% of price) underscores frequent price swings**. News sentiment remains neutral, contributing no directional bias, while the **CMF (–0.08) suggests weak institutional buying pressure**.
The stock shows **short-term positive momentum (MACD, RSI, ROC) but is trapped below critical moving averages (50-day, 200-day) and SAR**, indicating a structural downtrend despite recent gains.
This divergence between short-term strength and long-term weakness creates a **high-risk/reward technical setup**, where breakouts or breakdowns could trigger significant moves.
There is **no available news-driven evidence** in the dataset to influence sentiment or valuation, leaving the stock’s narrative entirely data-dependent.
Without news catalysts, the stock’s trajectory relies **entirely on technical and fundamental data**, amplifying reliance on quantitative signals.
The **Calmar ratio (0.79) and extreme max drawdown (47.5%) reveal high volatility risk**, while the ATR (5.0%) confirms frequent, sharp price movements—potentially destabilizing for risk-averse investors.
These metrics suggest the stock is **not suited for conservative portfolios**, as drawdowns could erode gains rapidly despite high returns.
StockIQ conclusion
PRTC.TA’s **moderate score of 48** reflects a stock with **contradictory signals**: short-term momentum coexists with **structural downtrend pressures**, high volatility, and weak institutional backing. While **technical indicators hint at potential upside**, the **risk profile remains elevated**, particularly for investors sensitive to drawdowns. The lack of news-driven evidence means the stock’s trajectory hinges entirely on **quantitative performance**, making it a **high-risk, high-reward opportunity**—one that requires careful monitoring of moving averages and volatility trends.
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
41
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
37
Risk
42
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 PRTC.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
4
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
99
Fundamentals
—
Technical
37
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price (3M)
-17%
Market Narrative
45
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-5
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests **herding** as the dominant psychological state, as PRTC.TA’s modest gain (+1.4%) mirrors broader sector momentum (+5.2%). The absence of panic or euphoria signals a cautious, passive alignment rather than aggressive speculation or distress. FOMO is elevated but tempered by neutral RSI (54) and balanced sentiment, indicating speculative interest without overconfidence. The key open question: *Will this herding persist, or will divergence from peers trigger re-evaluation?*
Updated: 09/07/2026, 04:32 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 — 94/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with stark contrasts between cautious optimism and outright skepticism. Charles Mackay’s high score suggests no obvious signs of speculative mania, while Howard Marks’ mid-range verdict hints at a balanced risk-reward dynamic—though his cycle-focused variant flags it as mid-cycle, lessening its appeal. Meanwhile, the majority of value-oriented and growth-driven models—Graham, Fisher, Lynch, and Veblen—all default to neutral due to insufficient data, leaving their verdicts inconclusive. On the other end, disciplined trend-followers like Schwager and Loeb, along with cycle analysts like Nelson and Housel, paint a far bleaker picture, warning of overbought conditions, excessive risk, or volatility that would trigger exits. The efficient-market camp further undermines the stock’s case, arguing there’s no compelling evidence to outperform an index, leaving the debate hinging on whether the lack of data is a neutral gap or a red flag for those who prioritize clarity and conviction.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 94
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 84
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
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
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%
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 28
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)
🔴 26
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 253 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 5 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 clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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) — 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 PriorTech Ltd (PRTC.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 PRTC.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.
PRTC.TA's technical score is 37/100, 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: Price is above the 200-day average; ROC 12 days: 1.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.7% of price; Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PRTC.TA.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology