Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$10.10
▼ $0.00 (-0.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 04:58 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$1.58B
Day Range
$10.01 - $10.31
52-Week Range
$7.20 - $14.75
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
$8.78
Resistance
$11.08
-27.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/23 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 1.61
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -11.5% (negative)
Fundamental
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.
🗓️ 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
63
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
5d ago · $10.38
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 37 to 70 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
43
Quality
No data available
Value
55
Momentum
85
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
43
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 Wealthfront Corporation has centered on its expansion into mortgage lending, particularly its entry into California—a key market—where it is offering competitive rates approximately 0.50% below the national average. Analysts, including Wells Fargo, have maintained an optimistic outlook on the company, though with slightly adjusted price targets. Additionally, Wealthfront’s record total platform assets of $99.1 billion in June were highlighted, reflecting growth in its core wealth management business amid broader fintech sector performance.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Wealthfront Corporation. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
39
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
42
Fundamentals
43
Technical
85
Valuation
55
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.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+20%
Market Narrative
75
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+37
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior reflects traders’ fixation on the 1.3% resistance gap, a classic price-level bias. Overconfidence (score 20) hints at momentum-driven overreaction, while FOMO (35) suggests opportunistic buying despite neutral sentiment. The narrative gap (16) implies traders may overestimate positive catalysts relative to fundamentals. The key question: will traders break resistance or retreat if momentum stalls?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:37 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Wealthfront Expands its Digital-First Mortgage Offering to California"
"Wealthfront Reports Record Total Platform Assets of $99.1 Billion for June"
"Wealthfront Home Lending Launches in California with Rates ~0.50% Below the National Average"
"Wells Fargo Maintains Overweight on Wealthfront, Lowers Price Target to $11.5"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 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
Benjamin Graham — 75/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for *WLTH* reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology lens (83) and Benjamin Graham’s Enterprising Investor framework (77)—suggest this stock avoids obvious speculative bubbles or statistical mispricings, positioning it as a potential opportunity for contrarian or value-focused investors. In contrast, the lowest scores—from Nelson (9) and Veblen (8)—flag it as overbought or growth-chasing without substance, aligning with their skepticism toward speculative trends or non-essential consumption. Meanwhile, Fisher (42) and Lynch (27) dismiss it for lacking the growth or quality they prioritize, while Livermore (37) and Schwager (30) reject it outright due to trend resistance or lack of technical setups. The middle ground—Marks (72 vs. 54) and Smith (53)—shows nuance, where one sees reasonable risk pricing while another views it as a temporary hold rather than a core position. The debate hinges on whether *WLTH* is a contrarian value play (Graham, Mackay) or a speculative trap (Nelson, Veblen) with no clear edge for growth or trend-following strategies.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 75
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 75
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 53
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
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 43
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 42
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 42
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 40
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 39
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 34
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 32
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 29
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
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)
🔴 27
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 8
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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 190 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 0 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.
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.
Gross Margin
89.6%
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
-11.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-6.8%
ROA
-3.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.74
Cash
$440.81M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.61
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$10.80
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$10.80
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Barrons.com · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Motley Fool · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
MarketBeat · 9.9.2026
Wealthfront Corporation (WLTH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 63/100, rated "Moderate" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
WLTH currently scores 63/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
WLTH's technical score is 85/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Current ratio: 1.61; Price is above the 50-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -11.5% (negative); ATR: 4.6% of price; Return on equity (ROE): -6.8% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for WLTH.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 11 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GOLDMAN KENNETH A | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $10.00 |
| Lin Lauren | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.8.2026 | 207,000 | +207,000 | — |
| Lin Lauren | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.8.2026 | 207,000 | +207,000 | — |
| Wetterwald Julien | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 15,263 | -15,263 | $9.16 |
| Wetterwald Julien | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 15,264 | -15,264 | $9.36 |
| Wetterwald Julien | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 711,788 | -15,264 | $9.36 |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Open Market Sale | 7.7.2026 | 8,503 | -8,503 | $9.50 |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Open Market Sale | 7.7.2026 | 0 | -8,503 | $9.50 |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 8,504 | -8,504 | $9.39 |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 8,503 | -8,504 | $9.39 |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| Schmidt Michael Reed | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| KILAR JASON | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| WILSON L MICHELLE | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| RACHLEFF ANDREW S | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| GOLDMAN KENNETH A | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| WILSON L MICHELLE | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| RACHLEFF ANDREW S | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| GOLDMAN KENNETH A | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| KILAR JASON | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| Bisharat Jaleh | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| Schmidt Michael Reed | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 19,446 | +19,446 | — |
| Wetterwald Julien | Open Market Sale | 17.6.2026 | 39,810 | -39,810 | $8.46 |
| Lin Lauren | Open Market Sale | 17.6.2026 | 4,840 | -4,840 | $8.45 |
| IYER KAL | Open Market Sale | 17.6.2026 | 28,498 | -28,498 | $8.46 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,777,517 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 7,461,163 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
72.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.3% 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