Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$29.74
▼ $0.91 (-3.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 11:51 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$29.62 - $30.80
52-Week Range
$22.26 - $40.95
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$28.14
Resistance
$37.20
TOST is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-28.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/26 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 24.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.25 (3y annualized return 13.5% / max drawdown 54.7%)
Risk
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 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
52
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
58
Value
45
Momentum
23
Risk
48
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
62
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 Toast, Inc. has centered on its strong Q2 2026 earnings performance, which surpassed estimates for both earnings per share and revenue, particularly driven by subscription services and financial technology solutions. The company raised its 2026 outlook for recurring gross profit and adjusted EBITDA, signaling confidence in growth through expanded restaurant adoption and payment volumes. Analysts have adjusted their fair value estimates upward, reflecting optimism about Toast’s product momentum, long-term frameworks, and AI investments, though competition and stock valuation concerns remain debated. Broker recommendations lean bullish, but skepticism persists about overvaluation.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Toast, Inc.. News trend score: 80. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
27
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
31
Fundamentals
62
Technical
23
Valuation
45
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+21%
Market Narrative
45
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+4
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
TOST’s psychology is dominated by **Euphoria**, driven by extreme positive sentiment (100/100) and a 17.6% premium to its 200-day average, despite neutral momentum and RSI. The narrative-reality gap (16 points) suggests investors may be overestimating fundamentals, as price momentum lags EPS growth by 23.4%. Key open question: Will sentiment sustain despite weak technicals, or will valuation correct as fundamentals materialize? The lack of herding or anchoring implies no clear external catalyst is driving behavior—pure conviction in upside persists.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:25 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Toast earnings beat and raised outlook put Q2 results in focus"
"driven by subscription services and financial technology solutions"
"pairing this improved outlook with ongoing investment in AI-driven products"
"market-based multiples suggest the stock is priced on the rich side"
📈 11D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 1/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that the high‑scoring proponents—Nelson, Lynch, and Bagehot—see TOST as favorably positioned in its cycle, under‑priced relative to its growth, and liquid enough to survive credit stress, reflected in scores of 100, 95, and 93. The mid‑range scores from Marks, Veblen, Fisher, Smith, and Schwager (roughly 50‑68) suggest a more nuanced view, acknowledging solid fundamentals but noting limited exceptional quality or a clear investment edge. In contrast, the conservative value and trend‑following frameworks of Graham, Graham‑Enterprising, Livermore, and Loeb assign low scores (25‑47), indicating the stock fails strict safety margins, appears over‑priced, or contradicts trend‑following rules. Hence, the debate arises because growth‑ and cycle‑oriented methodologies view the stock positively, while safety‑margin and trend‑based approaches deem it relatively risky.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 95
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 93
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 79
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)
🟢 68
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
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 65
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 50
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)
🟡 47
Moderate risk 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)
🔴 35
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 (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
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 25
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 1
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 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 bearish · 1 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.
Gross Margin
25.9%
Operating Margin
4.7%
Net Margin
5.6%
EBITDA Margin
5.8%
ROE
16.1%
ROA
10.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.59
Cash
$1.35B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.75
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$3.50
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.29
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 13 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
StockStory · 8.9.2026
Toast, Inc. (TOST) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
TOST currently scores 52/100 (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.
TOST's technical score is 23/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 24.1%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 1766.7%; Net income growth: 1700.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.25 (3y annualized return 13.5% / max drawdown 54.7%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TOST.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 14,280 | -14,280 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 5,100 | -5,100 | $33.54 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 14,280 | +14,280 | $2.21 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 9,180 | -9,180 | $34.10 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 69,966 | -85,280 | $36.34 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 155,246 | +37,607 | $17.33 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 175,256 | -37,607 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 117,639 | +47,673 | $17.38 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 190,575 | -47,673 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 85,280 | -85,280 | $36.34 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 37,607 | -37,607 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 47,673 | +47,673 | $17.38 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 37,607 | +37,607 | $17.33 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 47,673 | -47,673 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 7,399 | -7,399 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 7,399 | +7,399 | $17.38 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 6,532 | -6,532 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 13,931 | -13,931 | $36.01 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 6,532 | +6,532 | $17.33 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.8.2026 | 6,146 | -6,146 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.8.2026 | 7,651 | -7,651 | — |
| Vassil Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 13,797 | -13,797 | $36.01 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.8.2026 | 6,146 | +6,146 | $17.33 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.8.2026 | 7,651 | +7,651 | $17.38 |
| Vassil Jonathan | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 11.8.2026 | 77,617 | +7,651 | $17.38 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
28,664,413 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 34,304,036 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
68.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.7% 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