Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$5.25
▲ $0.00 (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 07:34 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/01/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$5.24 - $5.25
52-Week Range
—
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$5.15
Resistance
$5.25
TALK is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+101.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 19/29 factors positiveRisk: Low
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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 22.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Relative strength vs. S&P 500
-1.0% over the last 3 months relative to the index
Technical
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (74/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (45/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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.
🗓️ 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
64
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
74
Quality
63
Value
45
Momentum
71
Risk
70
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
58
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of **Talkspace, Inc.** has centered on its **acquisition by Universal Health Services (UHS)**, finalized in August 2026 after securing all regulatory approvals. The $835 million deal, framed as a strategic move to expand UHS’s virtual behavioral health offerings, has been described as a "game changer" in the growing $159 billion U.S. mental health market. While no operational or financial details beyond the merger are highlighted, the focus remains on UHS’s push into digital mental health platforms amid industry consolidation.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Talkspace, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 3 of the last 12 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
58
Technical
71
Valuation
45
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
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)
+1%
Market Narrative
52
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+10
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for TALK is dominated by anchoring, with traders fixated on the stock’s exact alignment with resistance, creating a psychological barrier. FOMO exists at low levels, suggesting limited urgency despite positive momentum and sentiment. The narrative gap (52 vs. 42) hints at a disconnect where optimism slightly outpaces tangible fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will break resistance or adjust expectations if momentum stalls. Overconfidence is absent, as price growth lags earnings growth, reinforcing cautious optimism rather than reckless bets.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 07:31 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
""UHS Adds Talkspace to Accelerate Virtual Behavioral Health Growth""
""Talkspace And UHS Obtain All Required State Healthcare Approvals For Merger As Of Aug 11""
""Traditional AI chatbots were 'never developed' for therapy: Talkspace CEO""
""U.S. Mental Health Treatment Market Report 2026–2030: Evaluating $159 Billion Forecast""
📈 13D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: the bullish, long-term-oriented investors and the cautious, cycle-sensitive or value-focused ones. Bagehot, Housel, Lynch, and Loeb all see strong fundamentals—whether in liquidity, quiet compounding potential, or growth mispricing—with scores near the top, suggesting they’d prioritize resilience, patient holding, or undervalued upside. Meanwhile, Graham’s strict defensive criteria and Nelson’s cycle warning (score 10) flag red flags, while Livermore, Schwager, and the efficient-market camp see no clear edge or overvaluation, leaning toward neutrality or passive strategies. Even Marks and Fisher, though more moderate, highlight that while risks are priced reasonably, the stock lacks the exceptional quality or clear trend to justify aggressive bets.
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 100
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 94
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 88
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
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)
🟢 73
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 67
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 65
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 61
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
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)
🟡 59
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 48
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 40
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 36
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 13
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 258 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 4 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$5.15
Range Bottom
$5.25
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
43.0%
Operating Margin
1.4%
Net Margin
3.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.7%
ROA
5.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.05
Cash
$37.35M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
6.38
Debt/Equity
0.00
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$0.70
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.68
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 3 positive, 9 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 12 articles.
Simply Wall St. · 26.8.2026
Zacks · 18.8.2026
MT Newswires · 17.8.2026
PR Newswire · 17.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 17.8.2026
Healthcare Dive · 17.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
MarketBeat · 28.7.2026
Moby · 28.7.2026
Yahoo Finance Video · 8.7.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 30.6.2026
Business Wire · 9.6.2026
Talkspace, Inc. (TALK) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 64/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
TALK currently scores 64/100 (Moderate) 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.
TALK's technical score is 71/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 22.0%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 300.0%; Net income growth: 578.8%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: -1.0% over the last 3 months relative to the index; P/E: 111.7; CMF 20 days: -0.14.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TALK.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hansen Michael E | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 200,211 | -200,211 | — |
| Warfield Curtis | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 63,402 | -63,402 | — |
| Warfield Curtis | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 48,222 | -48,222 | — |
| Warfield Curtis | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 203,160 | -203,160 | — |
| Hansen Michael E | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 48,222 | -48,222 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 22,476 | -22,476 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 247,500 | -247,500 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 33,357 | -33,357 | — |
| Hansen Michael E | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 203,959 | -203,959 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 13,626 | -13,626 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 28,897 | -28,897 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 15,161 | -15,161 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 38,851 | -38,851 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 27,251 | -27,251 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 25,604 | -25,604 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 267,836 | -267,836 | — |
| Benzur Liat | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 77,446 | -77,446 | — |
| Reilly John Charles | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 5,907 | -5,907 | — |
| Shachar Erez | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 71,646 | -71,646 | — |
| Benzur Liat | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 78,830 | -78,830 | — |
| Braunstein Douglas L | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 2,038,612 | -2,038,612 | — |
| Braunstein Douglas L | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 48,222 | -48,222 | — |
| Pawar Madhu | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 341,734 | -341,734 | — |
| Braunstein Douglas L | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 9,795,600 | -9,795,600 | — |
| Braunstein Douglas L | Disposition to the Company | 17.8.2026 | 640,000 | -640,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,110,122 shares short as of 2026-07-31 · vs. 3,707,359 on 2026-07-15
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
57.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 40.2% 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