Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
647.50 ₪
▲ 22.50 ₪ (+3.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 03:01 AM
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
625.00 ₪ - 669.00 ₪
52-Week Range
218.40 ₪ - 912.70 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
585.30 ₪
Resistance
830.00 ₪
TSEM.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.
+306.7% (1Y)
🔴 Weak
Strengths: 5/12 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 2.25 (3y annualized return 85.2% / max drawdown 37.9%)
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 5.8% 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.
TSEM.TA exhibits a **WEAK** overall investor score of **29**, driven primarily by its **technical performance**, which is weighed down by persistent weakness in momentum and positioning. The stock’s price remains **below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages**, signaling a prolonged bearish trend, while the **negative MACD histogram** and **oversold %K (19.8)** further indicate a lack of upward momentum. Though the **Calmar ratio (2.01)** suggests historically high returns relative to drawdowns (76.0% annualized return with a 37.9% max drawdown), the **6.3% ATR** and recent **-4.3% underperformance vs. the index** highlight volatility and relative weakness. Meanwhile, the **news and risk categories** score moderately (50/100), with no explicit negative news but no clear catalysts either—leaving the stock’s trajectory dependent on broader market conditions or sector-specific developments.
The stock is trading below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, with a negative MACD histogram, RSI of 43.1 (oversold), and a %K of 19.8, all signaling weak momentum and potential short-term exhaustion.
These technical indicators collectively suggest a bearish bias, which could limit upside potential unless a reversal occurs.
No explicit news or sentiment data is provided, resulting in a neutral score of 50/100—meaning no positive or negative catalysts are currently reflected in the analysis.
The absence of news data means the stock’s performance is driven entirely by technical and risk factors rather than external developments.
The stock exhibits a **6.3% ATR**, indicating moderate volatility, while its **Calmar ratio (2.01)**—though strong—reflects a high-risk/reward profile with a **37.9% max drawdown** over three years.
The volatility and drawdown history suggest the stock carries significant risk, particularly for investors sensitive to sharp price swings.
StockIQ conclusion
TSEM.TA’s **WEAK** score reflects a stock struggling with **persistent technical weakness**, high volatility, and relative underperformance. While its **historical risk-adjusted returns** are compelling for long-term investors, the **current bearish momentum, oversold conditions, and lack of catalysts** create significant hurdles. The absence of negative news suggests stability in fundamentals, but without a clear reversal in technicals or sector trends, the stock remains vulnerable to further downside. Investors should monitor **moving average breaks, volatility shifts, or news developments** as potential turning points.
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
51
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
52
Risk
50
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 TSEM.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
14
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
—
Technical
52
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.
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.
Price (3M)
-23%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+4
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here suggests a dominant *herding* dynamic, where participants align with peer movements (+1.8% vs. +1.7%) without extreme sentiment or momentum. Loss aversion (29) hints at defensive positioning, but the absence of panic (18) or euphoria (0) keeps the trend orderly. The narrative gap (-15) implies a disconnect between investor expectations and current fundamentals, which could either stabilize or trigger rebalancing. Key uncertainty remains whether this herding reflects a tactical trade or a broader shift in sector positioning.
Updated: 09/05/2026, 07:21 PM
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 — 78/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on their documented principles, the model estimates that investors like Charles Mackay (score 86) and Howard Marks (scores 77 and 63) see relatively modest optimism, noting no crowd mania and an early‑to‑mid cycle environment with some concerns about high expectations. In contrast, a large group of classic value and growth thinkers—including Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Livermore, Bagehot, Veblen, and Graham’s enterprising variant—receive neutral 50 scores because the data required for their specific analyses (balance‑sheet depth, growth metrics, insider activity, etc.) is missing, leading them to withhold a definitive view. More risk‑averse or statistically oriented frameworks, such as Loeb (score 31), Smith (score 15), and especially Morgan Housel (score 0), flag the stock’s volatility and capital‑risk profile as problematic, suggesting a cautious or negative stance. Overall, the debate reflects a split between modestly favorable cycle‑based readings and a broader uncertainty driven by data gaps and heightened risk concerns.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
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)
🟢 75
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)
🟡 64
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 57
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%
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%
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 46
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 31
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
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)
🔴 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 254 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 4 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.
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 Tower Semiconductor Ltd (TSEM.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 TSEM.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.
TSEM.TA's technical score is 52/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: 2.25 (3y annualized return 85.2% / max drawdown 37.9%); Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 5.8% of price; Price is below the 50-day average; -25.1% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TSEM.TA.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology