Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$9.07
▼ $0.14 (-1.5%)
Market data updated: 09/18 09:54 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$886.98M
Day Range
$9.07 - $9.30
52-Week Range
$5.00 - $12.44
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
+36.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 110.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$10.55 vs. price $9.07 (-216.3%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (82/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
48
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
42
Value
38
Momentum
16
Risk
26
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
56
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 Abacus Global Management, Inc. highlights its strong financial performance and strategic initiatives. The company reported record Q2 2026 revenues of $73 million, a 30% year-over-year increase, driven by its Life Solutions segment. Additionally, Abacus announced a $100 million share buyback program and published a CIO analysis addressing valuation methodology and interest rate trends. The firm also escalated legal action against Coventry First, alleging defamatory statements, while its stock performance has been compared to sector peers.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Abacus Global Management, Inc.. News trend score: 92. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
19
Fundamentals
56
Technical
16
Valuation
38
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.
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-2%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+18
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
ABX’s psychology is fragmented but dominated by **FOMO and herding**, with euphoria and overconfidence as secondary signals. The narrative gap (64 vs. 39) suggests traders may be overestimating positive catalysts, while the stock’s underperformance relative to peers (-2.7% vs. -0.2%) hints at selective buying. The key question is whether momentum (+5.1% ROC) will sustain or if the 12.4% distance from support could trigger a re-evaluation. Low panic selling (score 1) and neutral RSI (49) imply no extreme distress, but herding behavior may amplify volatility if peers reverse.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:17 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"record Q2 2026 revenues of $73M, up 30% YoY"
"Abacus Moves to Amend Complaint and Seek Increased Damages Against Coventry and its Chairman"
"$100 Million Share Buyback Program"
"CIO Analysis on Discount Rate Trends and Updated Valuation Methodology"
📈 15D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 95/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with Peter Lynch’s high score (84) suggesting it’s a compelling growth candidate—his model sees untapped upside in the price relative to its potential. Meanwhile, Fisher (71) and Mackay (68) lean cautiously positive, with Fisher noting solid fundamentals but no exceptional quality and Mackay detecting early crowd enthusiasm. However, the majority of frameworks—particularly Graham’s (14) and Bagehot’s (13)—reject it outright, flagging valuation risks, liquidity concerns, and defensive failures. Even the more flexible Enterprising Investor variant (0) dismisses it as statistically uncheap, while Livermore (42) and Schwager (15) warn against its trend and lack of disciplined setup. The split reflects a tension between growth optimism and deep-value skepticism, with only a few methodologies finding even modest merit.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 95
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 84
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)
🟢 73
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)
🟢 71
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 51
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 44
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 39
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 37
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)
🔴 23
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 20
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 17
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 13
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 9 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.
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
87.7%
Operating Margin
37.7%
Net Margin
15.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
8.6%
ROA
4.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.38
Cash
$38.11M
Total Debt
$405.82M
Current Ratio
0.47
Debt/Equity
0.96
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 2.12.2025 | $0.200 |
| 1.12.2025 | $0.200 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$9.07
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$10.55
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-216.3%
🔴 Appears expensive 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% | $-33.26M | $-30.52M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-39.71M | $-33.42M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-45.17M | $-34.88M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-48.84M | $-34.60M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-50.06M | $-32.54M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-26.61M
Terminal Value
$-789.43M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-513.07M
Enterprise Value
$-679.03M
Net Debt
$367.71M
Equity Value
$-1.05B
*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
$4.35
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.66
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Business Wire · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 19.8.2026
Business Wire · 19.8.2026
Motley Fool · 14.8.2026
MT Newswires · 13.8.2026
Business Wire · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Abacus Global Management, Inc. (ABX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
ABX currently scores 48/100 (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, ABX's estimated fair value is -$10.55, which is 216.3% below the current price of $9.07. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ABX's technical score is 16/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 110.2%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 205.9%; Free cash flow growth: 87.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$10.55 vs. price $9.07 (-216.3%); Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.2% of price.
Yes — ABX has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 125,000 | -125,000 | $9.10 |
| Jackson Jay J | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 196,000 | -196,000 | $8.77 |
| Jackson Jay J | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 10,397,430 | -196,000 | $8.77 |
| Ganovsky Matthew | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 38,333 | -38,333 | $10.31 |
| McNealy Sean | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 38,333 | -38,333 | $10.31 |
| Kirby Kevin Scott | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 38,334 | -38,334 | $10.31 |
| Ganovsky Matthew | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 8,755,260 | -38,333 | $10.31 |
| Kirby Kevin Scott | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 12,610,305 | -38,334 | $10.31 |
| McNealy Sean | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 12,610,606 | -38,333 | $10.31 |
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 65,583 | -65,583 | $11.86 |
| Butcher Samantha | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 62,753 | -62,753 | $11.86 |
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 1,040,260 | -65,583 | $11.86 |
| Butcher Samantha | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.7.2026 | 424,688 | -62,753 | $11.86 |
| Plesco Elena | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| Butcher Samantha | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| Jackson Jay J | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,000,000 | +2,000,000 | — |
| Jackson Jay J | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 2,000,000 | +2,000,000 | — |
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| Plesco Elena | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| Butcher Samantha | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 1,000,000 | +1,000,000 | — |
| McCauley William Hugh JR | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 46,927 | -46,927 | $9.08 |
| McNealy Sean | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 27,773 | -27,773 | $9.08 |
| Ganovsky Matthew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 27,773 | -27,773 | $9.08 |
| Kirby Kevin Scott | Tax Withholding in Shares | 8.5.2026 | 27,773 | -27,773 | $9.08 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,866,099 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 5,567,138 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.4% 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