Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
47.60 ₪
▲ 0.00 ₪ (+0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 10:12 AM
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
47.13 ₪ - 48.57 ₪
52-Week Range
21.51 ₪ - 53.74 ₪
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
39.88 ₪
Resistance
53.11 ₪
VRDS.TA is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
+120.6% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 2/12 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is above the 200-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
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.
VRDS.TA demonstrates a **strong technical foundation** with a score of 89, driven by consistent bullish signals such as sustained price action above both the 50-day (8.2%) and 200-day (12.5%) moving averages, alongside a positive MACD histogram (0.12) and RSI of 66.4, indicating healthy upward momentum. However, the stock’s overbought %K reading at 88.5 suggests potential short-term exhaustion, while the ATR of 4.1% reflects moderate volatility. The **news category**, scoring 50, lacks explicit sentiment data but aligns with the stock’s relative outperformance (+1.4% vs. index over 3 months). Risk metrics are the weakest, with a Calmar ratio of 1.53—indicating a high reward-to-risk tradeoff but also a significant historical drawdown (28.8%) relative to its 3-year annualized return (43.9%). The overall **investorScore of 73** reflects a balanced mix of technical strength and inherent volatility/risk, though the lack of news-driven catalysts may limit upside clarity.
Price remains above both 50-day and 200-day moving averages, with positive MACD momentum and RSI in healthy territory (66.4), though %K is overbought at 88.5.
This suggests strong near-term momentum but also potential for a pullback due to overbought conditions.
No explicit news sentiment data exists, but the stock has outperformed its index by +1.4% over the last 3 months.
The absence of news-driven catalysts means performance relies solely on technical and risk factors.
ATR of 4.1% indicates moderate volatility, while the Calmar ratio (1.53) highlights a high-risk/reward profile with a 28.8% historical drawdown.
Investors should weigh the potential for high returns against the risk of significant drawdowns.
StockIQ conclusion
VRDS.TA exhibits strong technical indicators with price above critical moving averages and positive momentum, supported by relative outperformance. However, the stock’s high volatility (ATR 4.1%) and historical drawdown (28.8%) introduce meaningful risk, while the absence of news-driven catalysts limits upside clarity. The overall score of 73 reflects a compelling but volatile opportunity, where technical strength must be balanced against inherent risk factors.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
as of 09/10/202641
This Week
73
7D Ago
↓ -32
Weakening
Technical
35
7D Ago: 89
↓ -54
News
50
7D Ago: 50
→ 0
Risk
50
7D Ago: 42
↑ +8
Biggest Improvements
Biggest Declines
📊 Score History
41
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
⚖️ Base Case
41 / 100
🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of September 10, 2026
Then
73
$50.60
Now
41
$47.60
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 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
35
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 VRDS.TA...
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
—
Technical
35
Valuation
—
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+7%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-13
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests traders are chasing gains driven by strong momentum (+20% ROC) and elevated volume, consistent with FOMO and early euphoria. The neutral news sentiment (50/100) and lack of volatility spikes (ATR 0.96x baseline) rule out panic or extreme fear. The key open question: *Will traders anchor near resistance (4.1% away) or sustain momentum despite neutral sentiment?* The narrative gap (18-point discrepancy) may signal traders overestimating upside potential relative to fundamentals.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 05:16 PM
What could change this?
📈 6D 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 — 86/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 8/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a clash between momentum-driven and fundamental/value-oriented approaches. Jesse Livermore’s near-perfect score highlights a strong technical trend aligned with his principles, while the lower scores from Howard Marks and Charles Mackay suggest caution about overvaluation or speculative hype. Meanwhile, methodologies requiring deeper financial scrutiny—like Graham, Fisher, or Lynch—lack sufficient data to form a definitive opinion, leaving them neutral. On the opposite end, Morgan Housel and Samuel Nelson flag extreme volatility and overbought conditions, warning against impulsive bets, whereas Gerald Loeb’s low score signals systemic risk concerns. The contrast underscores how technical traders and patient investors often reach opposing conclusions when fundamentals are murky.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 82
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 63
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 51
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 14
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)
🔴 8
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.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 26.4.2022 | 30.189 ₪ |
| 25.4.2022 | 30.189 ₪ |
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 Veridis Ltd (VRDS.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 VRDS.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.
VRDS.TA's technical score is 35/100, 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: Price is above the 200-day average; +5.2% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend.
Yes — VRDS.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