Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
350.00 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:21 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
334.70 ₪ - 360.30 ₪
52-Week Range
320.20 ₪ - 839.80 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
320.20 ₪
Resistance
549.20 ₪
QLTU.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.
-11.3% (1Y)
🔴 Weak
Strengths: 1/12 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
MACD
MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 6.5% 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.
QLTU.TA exhibits a **WEAK** overall investor score of **25**, heavily influenced by its **technical** and **risk** metrics, which dominate the negative outlook. The stock’s price remains **below both the 50-day (12.1%) and 200-day (25.3%) moving averages**, signaling sustained weakness, while the **negative MACD histogram** and **low RSI (34.8)** confirm a bearish momentum trend. Though the **news category** scores moderately at **50**, the lack of supporting evidence suggests no offsetting positive narrative. Risk metrics are particularly concerning: the **8.2% ATR** indicates high volatility relative to price, and the **Calmar ratio of 1.27**—paired with a **60.1% max drawdown**—highlights extreme risk-adjusted performance instability. The **31.8% underperformance vs. the index** over three months further underscores the stock’s struggles in relative terms. The absence of strengths in the provided data compounds the negative signals, leaving little counterbalance to the technical and risk pressures.
The stock is trading **below both the 50-day (12.1%) and 200-day (25.3%) moving averages**, with a **negative MACD histogram** and **RSI of 34.8**, indicating weak momentum and oversold conditions. The %K at 35.3 remains neutral, failing to signal a reversal.
These technical indicators collectively suggest a **prolonged downtrend** with no imminent signs of recovery, making it a high-risk speculative play.
The **news score of 50** lacks specific evidence, implying either **neutral media coverage** or **no material developments** to support the stock’s valuation.
Without positive or negative news catalysts, the stock’s trajectory relies entirely on **technical and fundamental performance**, both of which are currently weak.
The **8.2% ATR** reflects extreme volatility, while the **Calmar ratio of 1.27** (3-year annualized return: **76.4%**, max drawdown: **60.1%**) reveals **high risk-adjusted volatility**—typical of speculative or distressed stocks.
Such metrics suggest the stock is **highly sensitive to market shifts**, with potential for **sharp drawdowns** even if momentum temporarily improves.
StockIQ conclusion
QLTU.TA’s **WEAK rating (25)** is driven by **persistent technical weakness**, **high risk metrics**, and **underperformance relative to peers**, with no compensating strengths in the data. The stock’s **oversold conditions**, **negative momentum indicators**, and **extreme volatility** suggest it remains in a **bearish phase**, though speculative traders may monitor for reversal signals. Without clear catalysts or fundamental improvements, the current outlook remains **cautiously negative**, relying entirely on future data shifts to alter the trajectory.
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
37
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
31
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 QLTU.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
6
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
—
Technical
31
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.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-38%
Market Narrative
43
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-7
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here suggests a dominant **loss aversion** bias, likely due to the steep 33.4% drop over three months, which may be prompting investors to hold or exit cautiously. Herding is active but not dominant, as the stock’s recent +7.9% gain outpaces peers, indicating some momentum-driven participation. The absence of euphoria or overconfidence signals no extreme bullish sentiment, while low FOMO and panic scores suggest no panic-driven selling or FOMO-driven buying. The key open question is whether the recent rally (+7.9%) will sustain or if loss-averse investors will tighten stops, reversing momentum.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:42 AM
What could change this?
📈 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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those that see this stock as a cautious buy and those that flag it as risky or unattractive. On one end, Mackay, Smith, and Marks (both cycle-focused) all score it near-perfectly, suggesting it lacks speculative mania, fits a favorable market phase, and has no obvious dividend or growth gaps—though Smith’s verdict notes a data limitation. Schwager and Nelson also lean positive, with disciplined setups and cycle positioning that appears closer to oversold than overbought. Meanwhile, the opposite camp—including Livermore, Loeb, and Housel—scores it poorly, with Livermore rejecting it outright for moving against his trend-following rule, Loeb flagging excessive risk, and Housel dismissing it as volatile enough to unsettle patient investors. The middle ground is murky: Graham, Fisher, and Lynch all score it mid-range but cite insufficient data, while Malkiel/Bogle’s low score reflects their preference for passive indexing over this stock’s perceived complexity.
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 99
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)
🟢 73
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 69
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 56
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%
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%
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 30
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)
🔴 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
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
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 255 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 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.
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 4.9.2026 | 185.236 ₪ |
| 20.4.2026 | 253.878 ₪ |
| 19.4.2026 | 253.878 ₪ |
| 8.9.2025 | 201.108 ₪ |
| 7.9.2025 | 201.108 ₪ |
| 8.4.2025 | 337.623 ₪ |
| 7.4.2025 | 337.623 ₪ |
| 8.9.2024 | 188.987 ₪ |
| 7.9.2024 | 188.987 ₪ |
| 8.4.2024 | 338.336 ₪ |
| 7.4.2024 | 338.336 ₪ |
| 10.9.2023 | 131.114 ₪ |
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 Qualitau Ltd (QLTU.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 QLTU.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.
QLTU.TA's technical score is 31/100, 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.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 6.5% of price; Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — QLTU.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