Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$0.75
▼ $0.02 (-3.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 07:49 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$0.74 - $0.80
52-Week Range
$0.69 - $3.10
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$0.69
Resistance
$0.95
QSI is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-51.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/27 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
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: 28.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -4766.0% (negative)
Fundamental
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
43
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
40
Quality
58
Value
55
Momentum
28
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
35
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 coverage of Quantum‑Si has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings and the status of its Proteus™ platform. The company reported a quarterly loss of $0.11 per share but beat revenue expectations, prompting a 20% workforce reduction to align spending with a delayed Proteus launch now slated for Q2 2027. Alongside the earnings call, Quantum‑Si expanded its Proteus roadshow to additional U.S. and European cities and announced participation in the H.C. Wainwright Global Investment Conference.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Quantum-Si Incorporated. News trend score: 74. Reason: 4 of the last 16 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
9
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
25
Psychology
77
Fundamentals
35
Technical
28
Valuation
55
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-25%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
25
Narrative Gap
+27
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
QSI’s dominant **Loss Aversion** (66) reflects a prolonged drawdown (-16.8% in three months) and subdued trading activity, consistent with investors clinging to positions despite underperformance. The **Confirmation Bias** (33) further amplifies this, as the narrative-reality gap widens amid deteriorating fundamentals (margin compression, revenue stagnation). Meanwhile, **Herding** (42) suggests cautious underperformance relative to peers, but no panic or aggressive chasing. The key open question: *Will the gap between narrative and fundamentals force a re-evaluation, or will loss aversion persist as traders await clearer catalysts?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:15 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Proteus™ launch delayed to Q2 2027"
"Q2 EPS $(0.11) beats $(0.12) estimate"
"reduction in force of ~20% of workforce"
"affirms FY2026 sales guidance of $1.000M vs $1.033M estimate"
📈 12D 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
Benjamin Graham — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between value-oriented and risk-averse methodologies, with Graham’s school overwhelmingly bullish—both his defensive and enterprising frameworks see it as a high-potential opportunity, while Walter Bagehot’s credit resilience adds a layer of stability. Meanwhile, cycle-focused investors like Marks and Nelson split: Marks leans cautiously optimistic, while Nelson’s lower score suggests it’s not yet in a deeply oversold state. Contrastingly, Fisher, Livermore, and Housel dismiss it outright—Fisher finds no quality/growth edge, Livermore’s trend-following rules flag a negative signal, and Housel’s volatility aversion makes it a non-starter. Even Peter Lynch’s mixed verdict hints at overpriced growth, while Veblen’s skepticism questions whether earnings justify the hype. The stark contrast between Graham’s near-unanimous approval and the efficient-market camp’s dismissal (alongside Housel’s volatility warning) underscores whether this is a disciplined value play or a speculative gamble.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 94
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 82
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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 63
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 49
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)
🟡 39
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 33
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 30
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 26
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 21
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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?
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 (1 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.
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.
Gross Margin
47.3%
Operating Margin
-4766.0%
Net Margin
-4160.1%
EBITDA Margin
-4583.1%
ROE
-46.0%
ROA
-41.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.51
Cash
$21.64M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
7.64
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$0.75
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$12.55
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-121.54M | $-111.51M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-145.09M | $-122.12M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-165.04M | $-127.44M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-178.45M | $-126.42M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-182.91M | $-118.88M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-97.23M
Terminal Value
$-2.88B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.87B
Enterprise Value
$-2.48B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-2.48B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$1.11
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.11
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 4 positive, 12 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 16 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 9.9.2026
Motley Fool · 20.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 18.8.2026
Moby · 14.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 14.8.2026
MarketBeat · 14.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 12.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 27.7.2026
Business Wire · 16.6.2026
Quantum-Si Incorporated (QSI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, 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.
QSI currently scores 43/100 (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.
QSI's technical score is 28/100, 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: 28.2%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 7.64.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -4766.0% (negative); Net margin: -4160.1% (negative); ATR: 6.0% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for QSI.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 16 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LaPointe Christian | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 7,794 | -7,794 | $0.90 |
| Vieceli John S. | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 15,112 | -15,112 | $0.90 |
| Hawkins Jeffrey Alan | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 11,311 | -11,311 | $0.90 |
| Keyes Jeffry R. | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 4,117 | -4,117 | $0.90 |
| Hawkins Jeffrey Alan | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 3,669,802 | -11,311 | $0.90 |
| Keyes Jeffry R. | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 1,724,349 | -4,117 | $0.90 |
| Vieceli John S. | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 1,140,434 | -15,112 | $0.90 |
| LaPointe Christian | Open Market Sale | 23.6.2026 | 1,182,429 | -7,794 | $0.90 |
| Hawkins Jeffrey Alan | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 11,310 | -11,310 | $0.96 |
| Keyes Jeffry R. | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 4,116 | -4,116 | $0.96 |
| LaPointe Christian | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 7,794 | -7,794 | $0.96 |
| Vieceli John S. | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 15,111 | -15,111 | $0.96 |
| Hawkins Jeffrey Alan | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 3,681,113 | -11,310 | $0.96 |
| Keyes Jeffry R. | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 1,728,466 | -4,116 | $0.96 |
| Vieceli John S. | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 1,155,546 | -15,111 | $0.96 |
| LaPointe Christian | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 1,190,223 | -7,794 | $0.96 |
| Fattori Ruth A | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Kummeth Charles R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| RAKIN KEVIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Jafri Amir | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Makes Brigid | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Dowdy Paula | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Kenny John P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| Mendel Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
| ROTHBERG JONATHAN M | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 251,185 | +251,185 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,444,969 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 15,417,732 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.9% 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