Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$76.38
▲ $5.43 (+7.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 12:47 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$10.52B
Day Range
$72.50 - $77.42
52-Week Range
$26.10 - $93.03
Beta
—
Next Earnings
05.11.2026
Support
$65.46
Resistance
$88.40
VSAT is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+125.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/28 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 94.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -0.7% (negative)
Fundamental
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
57
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
68
Quality
63
Value
50
Momentum
54
Risk
54
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
34
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 ViaSat, Inc. has centered on market volatility and regulatory challenges, with headlines highlighting a **13.7% stock decline since its last earnings report**, raising questions about its rebound potential. Analysts like Jefferies flagged potential hurdles in ViaSat’s in-cabin satellite experience due to spectrum disputes with SPCX. Additionally, a congressional insider sold shares, while broader space sector trends showed ViaSat underperforming amid Rocket Lab’s (RKLB) growth from new military contracts. The company’s **ViaSat-3 F3 satellite launch** marked a key operational milestone.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about ViaSat, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 9 of the last 20 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
37
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
54
Fundamentals
34
Technical
54
Valuation
50
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+14%
Market Narrative
74
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+32
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peers (+3.3% peer gain) rather than fundamentals, consistent with a narrative-reality gap (28 points). FOMO and euphoria scores (26 each) imply momentum-driven enthusiasm, while overconfidence (10) hints at detached valuation. The key question: *Is this alignment sustainable, or will divergence emerge?* Low panic/selling (1) and stable volatility (0.80x ATR) reduce near-term risk, but the gap warns of potential mispricing.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:34 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"ViaSat-3 F3 satellite enters service across Asia-Pacific, doubling bandwidth and delivering over one terabit per second of throughput capacity."
"ViaSat (VSAT) down 13.7% since last earnings report."
"Possible snag to in-cabin experience owing to SPCX-VSAT spectrum fight."
📈 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
Benjamin Graham — 74/100
🔴 Weakest match
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 32/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for VSAT reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Benjamin Graham’s defensive and enterprising frameworks split sharply—his traditional approach scores the stock highly for its fundamentals, while the looser enterprising bar dismisses it as too expensive. Meanwhile, growth-oriented investors like Peter Lynch and Walter Bagehot see strong potential, with Lynch emphasizing undervaluation relative to growth and Bagehot praising its liquidity resilience. In contrast, Fisher and Marks (market-cycle) reject it outright, with Fisher dismissing its lack of signature quality and Marks warning of late-cycle risks. The middle ground—where investors like Malkiel, Nelson, or Livermore hesitate—highlights ambiguity: is this a speculative bet (Lynch) or a cautious hold (Housel)? The split underscores whether the stock’s strengths (growth, liquidity) outweigh its risks (valuation, market positioning) under each framework.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 74
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 74
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)
🟢 71
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 65
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 57
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 56
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 51
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 51
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 50
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 45
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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)
🟡 41
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 32
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
Based on the last 280 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 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
—
Operating Margin
2.3%
Net Margin
-0.7%
EBITDA Margin
2.3%
ROE
-0.7%
ROA
-0.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.25
Cash
$1.75B
Total Debt
$57.75M
Current Ratio
2.41
Debt/Equity
0.01
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$34.59
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$7.70
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 11 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Barrons.com · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Stocktwits · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
MT Newswires · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
StockStory · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
ViaSat, Inc. (VSAT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 57/100, 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.
VSAT currently scores 57/100 (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.
VSAT's technical score is 54/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 94.4%; Net income growth: 94.1%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -0.7% (negative); ATR: 5.7% of price; Return on equity (ROE): -0.7% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for VSAT.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ayyar Shekar G | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| Ayyar Shekar G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 1,231 | +1,231 | — |
| Ayyar Shekar G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 1,231 | -1,231 | — |
| BALDRIDGE RICHARD A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| WISE THERESA | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| Frenkel Barbara L | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| BALDRIDGE RICHARD A | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| Paull Michael | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
| Frenkel Barbara L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 5,974 | +5,974 | — |
| Paull Michael | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| Pak Sean | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| LaPlante William Albert | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| BALDRIDGE RICHARD A | Gift | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
| Pak Sean | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| LaPlante William Albert | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| STENBIT JOHN P | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| YOON JINHY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 1,231 | +1,231 | — |
| Paull Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.9.2026 | 3,485 | +3,485 | — |
| Pak Sean | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
| Pak Sean | Gift | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | -6,388 | — |
| WISE THERESA | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
| Pak Sean | Gift | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
| Frenkel Barbara L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 5,974 | -5,974 | — |
| YOON JINHY | Gift | 3.9.2026 | 1,231 | -1,231 | — |
| LaPlante William Albert | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 6,388 | +6,388 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
10,859,535 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,738,028 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 71.1% 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