Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Communication Services · ·
$13.92
▼ $0.34 (-2.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 04:51 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$13.89 - $14.50
52-Week Range
$12.83 - $56.39
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$12.83
Resistance
$20.53
TTD is a stock from the Communication Services sector — Telecom, media, and internet/social platforms — revenue from advertising and subscriptions.
-68.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/27 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $39.10 vs. price $13.92 (+180.9%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 5.0% of price
Risk
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
59
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
7d ago · $14.34
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -8 to 19 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
12d ago · $14.00
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -11 to 15 day-over-day
What happened after
15d ago · $14.43
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 22 to -7 day-over-day
What happened after
17d ago · $14.55
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -6 to 19 day-over-day
What happened after
17d ago · $14.55
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 5 to 36 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 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
73
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
34
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
74
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING TTD...
Recent media coverage of The Trade Desk has centered on its sharp decline, with headlines highlighting a **70% stock drop** and its **removal from the S&P 500** after Bloom Energy’s inclusion. The company announced a **15% workforce reduction**, signaling cost-cutting measures amid financial struggles. Analysts like Evercore ISI adjusted their price target slightly upward but maintained a neutral rating, while discussions about unusual cash reserves surfaced. The focus remains on its restructuring efforts following a turbulent market performance.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Trade Desk (The). News trend score: 74. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
20
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
31
Fundamentals
74
Technical
34
Valuation
62
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-25%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant **Loss Aversion** (60) reflects a market wary of further downside after a steep 3-month drop, despite modest momentum. **FOMO** (28) hints at cautious optimism from positive sentiment and momentum, but valuation gaps (-64% vs DCF) temper euphoria. The **narrative gap** (10) suggests traders may be overestimating recovery potential. Key question: Will volume sustain or fade as traders balance risk aversion with momentum-driven buying?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:28 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Bloom Energy Surges 8% as S&P 500 swaps it in for Trade Desk; TTD Stock Slips 2%"
"The Trade Desk cuts 15% of workforce"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 17D 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
Charles Mackay — 88/100
🔴 Weakest match
Gerald M. Loeb — 30/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with scores ranging from a cautious 83—where Mackay and Marks (Market Cycle) see no crowd mania or overextension—to a resounding 30, where Loeb and Nelson flag it as either overbought or a capital-threatening risk. The higher-scoring approaches (Mackay, Marks, Fisher, Schwager) emphasize disciplined, rule-based setups or relative value, while the lower end (Loeb, Nelson, Graham’s Enterprising Investor) leans into valuation concerns, cycle warnings, or trend resistance. Even Peter Lynch and Veblen, though mixed, suggest the stock’s price may already embed its growth potential, contrasting sharply with the more optimistic technical or cyclical readings. The split underscores whether the stock’s fundamentals or market positioning justify its price—or if it’s a speculative bet with hidden risks.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 84
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)
🟢 74
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 73
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 70
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 67
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 65
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 61
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 59
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 58
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 52
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 36
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 35
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 30
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
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 (2 bullish · 6 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.
Low 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
78.6%
Operating Margin
20.3%
Net Margin
15.3%
EBITDA Margin
24.3%
ROE
17.8%
ROA
7.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.91
Cash
$658.17M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.61
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$13.92
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$39.10
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+180.9%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
22.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 22.5% | $974.57M | $894.11M |
| 2 | 17.5% | $1.14B | $963.70M |
| 3 | 12.5% | $1.29B | $994.55M |
| 4 | 7.5% | $1.38B | $980.81M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $1.42B | $922.32M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$795.71M
Terminal Value
$22.38B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$14.54B
Enterprise Value
$19.30B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$19.30B
*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
$5.03
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.03
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 6 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
StockStory · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Trade Desk (The) (TTD) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 59/100, 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.
TTD currently scores 59/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, TTD's estimated fair value is $39.10, which is 180.9% above the current price of $13.92. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TTD's technical score is 34/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $39.10 vs. price $13.92 (+180.9%); Free cash flow growth: 24.1%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 5.0% of price; Calmar: -0.49 (3y annualized return -44.0% / max drawdown 90.7%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TTD.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davis Tahnil R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,220 | -1,220 | $14.14 |
| GRANT JAY R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 2,652 | -2,652 | $14.14 |
| Davis Tahnil R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,373 | -1,373 | $14.14 |
| Green Jeffrey Terry | Gift | 15.8.2026 | 52,910 | -52,910 | — |
| GRANT JAY R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 5,779 | -5,779 | $14.14 |
| Davis Tahnil R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,051 | -1,051 | $14.14 |
| Kundra Vivek | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 4,713 | -4,713 | $14.14 |
| Kundra Vivek | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 2,320 | -2,320 | $14.14 |
| Green Jeffrey Terry | Gift | 15.8.2026 | 52,910 | +52,910 | — |
| GRANT JAY R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 2,076 | -2,076 | $14.14 |
| GRANT JAY R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 2,848 | -2,848 | $14.14 |
| Davis Tahnil R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 5,317 | -5,317 | $14.14 |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 3,602 | +3,602 | $11.37 |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 20,893 | +20,893 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 25,505 | +25,505 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 3,602 | +3,602 | $11.37 |
| Olmstead Nathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 246,062 | +246,062 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 900 | +900 | $11.37 |
| Olmstead Nathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 439,753 | +439,753 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 25,505 | +25,505 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 20,893 | +20,893 | — |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 3,602 | +3,602 | $11.37 |
| Price Penry W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 900 | +900 | $11.37 |
| Olmstead Nathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 246,062 | +246,062 | — |
| Olmstead Nathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 439,753 | +439,753 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
87,651,673 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 75,368,761 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
40.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 37.1% 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