Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$4.97
▲ $0.07 (+1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/19 05:47 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$4.86 - $4.99
52-Week Range
$3.65 - $9.20
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$4.78
Resistance
$6.73
PTON is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-39.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 146.7%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.03 (3y annualized return 1.9% / max drawdown 64.9%)
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
40
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
60
Quality
63
Value
50
Momentum
9
Risk
54
Sentiment
26
Fundamental
50
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 Peloton Interactive has focused on its declining stock performance and investor concerns over long-term growth. Analysts like Morgan Stanley downgraded the company to "Underweight," citing structural headwinds—including a **78% drop in new subscriber additions** from pandemic peaks and high churn rates—while warning that shifting consumer preferences toward gyms and strength training could further pressure its subscriber base. Meanwhile, UBS maintained a "Buy" rating but lowered its price target slightly, reflecting mixed analyst sentiment.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Peloton Interactive, Inc.. News trend score: 26. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are negative, versus 6 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
55
Fundamentals
50
Technical
9
Valuation
50
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.
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)
-15%
Market Narrative
25
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
-17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
PTON’s psychology is dominated by **anchoring**—traders appear fixated on the 0.6% proximity to support, suggesting a reluctance to accept deeper declines. The **herding** score (25) reflects relative underperformance, while **panic selling** (28) is muted by low volatility (0.88x ATR). The narrative gap (-9) implies reality (fundamentals like EPS growth) may diverge from market perception, but the dominant focus remains on technical proximity to support. The key question: *Will traders break the anchor if support is breached, or will they hold near this psychological level?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:12 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"severe 78% decline in new subscriber additions from peak pandemic levels"
"Morgan Stanley downgraded Peloton to Underweight from Equal Weight on Tuesday, warning that a consumer shift toward strength training and gyms will keep pressure on the connected fitness company's subscriber base"
"Downward trends in its most important revenue generator were cause for concern"
"UBS lowers price target to $10 from $11, maintains Buy rating"
📈 8D 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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 17/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on documented principles, macro- and cycle-focused models like those of Charles Mackay, Walter Bagehot, and Samuel Armstrong Nelson evaluate PTON favorably, estimating strong liquidity, minimal crowd mania, and an oversold cycle position. Growth perspectives remain divided, as Peter Lynch's model sees opportunity in price lagging growth, whereas Philip Fisher's framework rejects the stock for lacking a high-quality growth signature. Value models such as Benjamin Graham's report mixed results due to an insufficient margin of safety and a lack of deep discount characteristics. Finally, momentum-based strategies like Jesse Livermore's score the company poorly, pointing to a negative trend that directly opposes rules on trading with market direction.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 97
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 94
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)
🟢 85
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 81
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 81
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 63
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 61
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 55
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 49
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 48
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
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)
🟡 48
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 29
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 17
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
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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.
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.
Gross Margin
52.6%
Operating Margin
6.6%
Net Margin
2.6%
EBITDA Margin
8.9%
ROE
-45.2%
ROA
3.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.15
Cash
$1.21B
Total Debt
$1.34B
Current Ratio
2.84
Debt/Equity
-9.59
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
-$0.32
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.45
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 4 neutral, 10 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
StockStory · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Barchart · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
The Fly · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Investing.com · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Motley Fool · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 3.9.2026
Peloton Interactive, Inc. (PTON) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
PTON currently scores 40/100 (Weak) 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.
PTON's technical score is 9/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 146.7%; Net income growth: 153.2%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.03 (3y annualized return 1.9% / max drawdown 64.9%); Return on equity (ROE): -45.2% (negative); Revenue growth (last year): -1.8%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PTON.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MENDEZ ANGEL L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | -9,022 | — |
| Bruzzo Chris | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | +9,022 | — |
| Comonte Tara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 8,458 | -8,458 | — |
| Boone Karen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | +9,022 | — |
| Bruzzo Chris | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | -9,022 | — |
| Comonte Tara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 8,458 | +8,458 | — |
| MENDEZ ANGEL L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | +9,022 | — |
| Thomas-Graham Pamela | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 8,458 | -8,458 | — |
| Thomas-Graham Pamela | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 8,458 | +8,458 | — |
| Boone Karen | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.9.2026 | 9,022 | -9,022 | — |
| Kirol Charles Peter | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 164,175 | +164,175 | — |
| Stern Peter C | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 664,015 | +664,015 | — |
| Baig Saqib | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 180,723 | +180,723 | — |
| Kirol Charles Peter | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 228,019 | +228,019 | — |
| Sanders Dion C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 273,623 | +273,623 | — |
| Baig Saqib | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 72,967 | +72,967 | — |
| Caldwell Nick V. | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 273,623 | +273,623 | — |
| Stern Peter C | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 196,328 | +196,328 | — |
| Baig Saqib | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 86,059 | +86,059 | — |
| Kirol Charles Peter | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 206,693 | +206,693 | — |
| Stern Peter C | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.9.2026 | 1,290,878 | +1,290,878 | — |
| Sanders Dion C. | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 112,512 | -112,512 | $5.45 |
| Baig Saqib | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 4,912 | -4,912 | $5.45 |
| Thacker Siddharth | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.8.2026 | 883,839 | -883,839 | — |
| Thacker Siddharth | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.8.2026 | 84,176 | -84,176 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
60,647,817 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 61,063,572 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
51.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 62.4% 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