Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Energy · ·
4.79 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:32 AM
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
4.73 ₪ - 4.82 ₪
52-Week Range
⚠️ Data anomaly
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
3.96 ₪
Resistance
4.82 ₪
RATI.TA is a stock from the Energy sector — Oil, gas, and renewable energy — highly volatile profitability, dependent on global commodity prices.
+10719.4% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 10/14 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 19.25 (3y annualized return 432.5% / max drawdown 22.5%)
Risk
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
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.
RATI.TA demonstrates a **strong overall score of 73**, driven primarily by robust technical performance and risk-adjusted returns, though its news category remains unweighted due to a lack of available data. The technical score of **85** reflects a clear upward momentum, with the stock trading above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages and a positive MACD histogram indicating rising bullish sentiment. However, caution is warranted as the RSI (75.2) and %K (93.2) metrics suggest the stock is nearing overbought levels, which could signal potential short-term volatility or a pullback. The risk score of **58** highlights a favorable risk-reward profile, with a **Calmar ratio of 19.12**—suggesting strong returns (436.6% annualized over three years) relative to its maximum drawdown of 22.8%—and a relatively stable average true range (ATR) of 2.7% of price. Without news-driven insights, the analysis relies heavily on quantitative trends, where the stock’s outperformance (+6.0% vs. the index over three months) stands out as a key strength.
The stock exhibits strong bullish momentum with prices above both 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and a 6.0% outperformance over the last three months. However, technical indicators like RSI (75.2) and %K (93.2) indicate overbought conditions, which may signal impending volatility.
Technical strength validates current bullish trends, but overbought signals could trigger short-term corrections or profit-taking.
No available news or qualitative data exists to assess sentiment, market reactions, or company-specific developments.
Lack of news data means the analysis cannot account for external factors that may influence stock performance.
The stock demonstrates a high Calmar ratio (19.12) with a 436.6% annualized return over three years and a manageable max drawdown of 22.8%, while ATR (2.7%) suggests moderate volatility.
The risk profile is favorable, indicating strong risk-adjusted returns, but drawdowns remain significant and could impact investor confidence.
StockIQ conclusion
RATI.TA presents a compelling quantitative profile with strong technical momentum, favorable risk-adjusted returns, and consistent outperformance. However, overbought technical indicators and the absence of news-driven insights introduce uncertainty. The stock’s high volatility and reliance on past performance highlight the need for cautious monitoring, particularly if overbought conditions persist or external risks materialize. Without additional qualitative data, the analysis remains data-dependent and limited to observable 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
68
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
77
Risk
58
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 RATI.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
34
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
90
Fundamentals
—
Technical
77
Valuation
—
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+12%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-3
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **anchoring** bias (83) reflects traders fixating on the 0.9% resistance gap, while **euphoria** (47) and **FOMO** (47) signal speculative momentum and overbought conditions. The narrative gap (4) hints at potential misalignment between optimism and fundamentals. Key question: Will traders break resistance or retreat if momentum stalls? The lack of panic (5) and low volatility (0.98x ATR) suggests caution, not desperation.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 12:51 AM
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
Morgan Housel — 63/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 6/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with only Jesse Livermore’s technical approach offering a clear bullish signal (74), while the rest either lack sufficient data or flag significant caution. Livermore’s positive trend verdict contrasts sharply with the overwhelming skepticism from cycle-focused investors like Samuel Armstrong Nelson (2) and Howard Marks (23), who see signs of overvaluation or late-cycle risks. Meanwhile, fundamentalists like Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, and Peter Lynch all default to neutral (50) due to insufficient data, while Howard Marks’ mixed verdict hints at a business with potential but already high expectations. The efficient-market camp (44) and Morgan Housel (43) lean toward indifference, suggesting the stock’s case is weak for active picking, while Charles Mackay’s low score (39) warns of speculative crowd behavior. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s price action (Livermore) or structural risks (Nelson, Marks) dominate the picture.
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 62
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
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%
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 47
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 41
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 6
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 an uptrend (9 bullish · 3 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 uptrend 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 |
|---|---|
| 2.9.2026 | 10.824 ₪ |
| 31.3.2026 | 10.824 ₪ |
| 30.3.2026 | 10.680 ₪ |
| 28.8.2025 | 10.824 ₪ |
| 27.8.2025 | 10.680 ₪ |
| 8.7.2025 | 13.527 ₪ |
| 7.7.2025 | 13.347 ₪ |
| 26.3.2025 | 10.824 ₪ |
| 25.3.2025 | 10.680 ₪ |
| 1.9.2024 | 8.117 ₪ |
| 31.8.2024 | 8.009 ₪ |
| 4.4.2024 | 8.117 ₪ |
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 Ratio Energies LP (RATI.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 RATI.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.
RATI.TA's technical score is 77/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: 19.25 (3y annualized return 432.5% / max drawdown 22.5%); Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; %K 90.7 — overbought; Volume is falling despite the price advance — possible weakening.
Yes — RATI.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