Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$22.91
▲ $1.38 (+6.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 08:08 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$2.86B
Day Range
$21.83 - $23.09
52-Week Range
$14.60 - $32.20
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$16.93
Resistance
$24.44
+48.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/27 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 82.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -3.9% (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
53
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
82
Quality
55
Value
50
Momentum
44
Risk
40
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
37
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 Allied Gold Corporation has centered on strategic developments and financial milestones. The company announced a **C$416.6 million investment from Zijin Gold**, completed its **Q2 2026 earnings call** with updates on progress toward production at its Kurmuk project, and saw **shareholder approval** for its board and auditor. Additionally, it welcomed **Joanna Pearson** to its board of directors, signaling leadership expansion. No major operational or financial crises were reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Allied Gold Corporation Common. News trend score: 68. Reason: 5 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
10
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
11
Fundamentals
37
Technical
44
Valuation
50
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-11%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant behavior aligns with **Loss Aversion**, as the stock’s recent underperformance (-8.7% over three months) and subdued trading volume (0.67x average) suggest investors are hesitant to realize losses. The narrative gap (narrativeScore 46 vs. realityScore 41) hints at a disconnect between market sentiment and fundamentals, but the lack of panic or euphoria signals cautious, risk-averse positioning. The key question is whether this reluctance will persist or shift if momentum or volume trends change. Low FOMO (score 6) and neutral RSI (52) imply no urgency to buy, reinforcing the defensive stance. Overconfidence and herding are absent, indicating no overreaction or herd mentality.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 07:13 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Allied Gold Completes C$416.6 Million Strategic Investment by Zijin Gold"
"reported quarterly earnings of $0.40 per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate of $0.17 by 135.29 percent"
"Allied Gold Nears Kurmuk Start-Up and Strengthens Financial Position"
"Allied Gold Shareholders Approve Board, Auditor as Kurmuk Nears Production"
📈 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
Peter Lynch — 98/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between growth-oriented and value-driven methodologies. Peter Lynch’s near-perfect score suggests it’s a high-growth candidate where the price hasn’t yet reflected its potential, aligning with his focus on undervalued future earnings power. Meanwhile, value-focused investors like Benjamin Graham and Walter Bagehot reject it outright, with Graham calling it statistically overpriced even for his more aggressive ‘Enterprising Investor’ criteria, while Bagehot flags liquidity risks. Mid-range scorers like Howard Marks (general) and Edgar Lawrence Smith see it as a reasonable long-term hold, but their caution contrasts sharply with the outright rejection from trend-followers like Jesse Livermore, who would avoid it entirely due to perceived downtrend signals. The divide underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in speculative growth or whether its risks outweigh its rewards for disciplined, rule-bound investors.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 98
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 87
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 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)
🟢 71
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 67
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
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)
🟡 63
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 56
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 49
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)
🔴 35
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)
🔴 33
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 30
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 28
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 26
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (3 bullish · 4 bearish · 3 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
38.0%
Operating Margin
19.8%
Net Margin
-3.9%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-12.7%
ROA
-2.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.45
Cash
$479.78M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.77
Debt/Equity
0.42
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$22.91
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$23.39
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+2.1%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $132.30M | $121.38M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $157.94M | $132.93M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $179.65M | $138.73M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $194.25M | $137.61M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $199.11M | $129.41M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$105.84M
Terminal Value
$3.14B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.04B
Enterprise Value
$2.70B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$2.70B
*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
$3.27
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 13 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 19.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 18.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
MT Newswires · 10.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 7.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 1.8.2026
MT Newswires · 30.7.2026
MT Newswires · 30.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Allied Gold Corporation Common (AAUC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 53/100, 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.
AAUC currently scores 53/100 (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, AAUC's estimated fair value is $23.39, which is 2.1% above the current price of $22.91. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AAUC's technical score is 44/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 82.3%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 65.1%; Free cash flow growth: 254.8%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -3.9% (negative); ATR: 4.3% of price; Current ratio: 0.77.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AAUC.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,700,716 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,212,674 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.9% 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