Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
$17.95
▲ $0.23 (+1.3%)
Market data updated: 09/20 09:22 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$1.61B
Day Range
$17.66 - $17.95
52-Week Range
$17.25 - $20.98
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$17.53
Resistance
$19.16
ADAMZ is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-7.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/23 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $19.92 vs. price $17.95 (+11.0%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.04 (3y annualized return 0.8% / max drawdown 22.1%)
Risk
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
50
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
74
Quality
50
Value
62
Momentum
14
Risk
50
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
51
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 **Adamas Trust Inc.** has centered on its financial performance and strategic initiatives. The company announced a **11.1% dividend increase** to $0.30 per share and a **public offering of senior notes**, signaling growth and capital access. Its **Q2 2026 earnings call** highlighted **record exposure at default (EAD) growth** and strong operational momentum, though analysts noted balance sheet risks and high debt. The company also passed a **growth investment screen** while facing broader REIT market challenges.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Adamas Trust Inc. 7.000% Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock $0.01 par value per share. News trend score: 86. Reason: 6 of the last 16 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
12
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
51
Technical
14
Valuation
62
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-6%
Market Narrative
50
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+0
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ADAMZ suggests a **neutral-to-cautious stance**, with herding (33) as the dominant psychological state. Traders appear to be following relative outperformance (+1.2% vs. peers) rather than extreme sentiment, while anchoring (14) hints at traders holding near support. The narrative gap (-9) implies a slight disconnect between market perception and fundamentals, but no clear bias like panic or euphoria is driving decisions. The key question: *Is the outperformance sustainable, or will traders pivot if momentum shifts?*
Updated: 09/06/2026, 05:30 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Record EAD Growth and Strategic..."
"Increases Quarterly Common Stock Dividend by 11.1% to $0.30 Per Share"
"balance sheet risks and high debt warrant caution"
📈 5D 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 — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 31/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish growth-oriented strategies and more cautious or neutral frameworks. Peter Lynch and Philip Fisher’s near-perfect scores suggest this stock aligns with their criteria for high-growth potential—Lynch sees it as undervalued relative to its growth trajectory, while Fisher’s lack of a verdict implies it meets his qualitative standards for deep research. Meanwhile, long-term compounders like Edgar Lawrence Smith and Morgan Housel also rate it highly, framing it as a patient investor’s ideal candidate for decade-long holding. However, the divide becomes stark when comparing these to more conservative or cyclical approaches: Benjamin Graham’s mixed verdict and the low scores from Livermore and the efficient-market camp reflect skepticism—either because the stock lacks Graham’s traditional value metrics or because its momentum doesn’t align with Livermore’s trend-following rules. Even Howard Marks, while not dismissive, flags moderate risk, while mid-cycle analysts like Nelson and Marks (cycle) remain neutral, highlighting a tension between growth enthusiasm and cyclical caution.
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 100
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 97
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 88
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 84
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 81
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 76
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: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 76
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 69
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)
🟢 68
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 67
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 65
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
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)
🟡 58
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 54
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)
🟡 45
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 31
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
Based on the last 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 9 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.
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
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
10.4%
ROA
1.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.12
Cash
$210.33M
Total Debt
$735.83M
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.52
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 1.7.2026 | $0.438 |
| 1.4.2026 | $0.438 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.438 |
| 1.10.2025 | $0.438 |
| 1.7.2025 | $0.438 |
| 1.4.2025 | $0.438 |
| 31.12.2024 | $0.438 |
| 1.10.2024 | $0.438 |
| 1.7.2024 | $0.438 |
| 28.3.2024 | $0.438 |
| 28.12.2023 | $0.438 |
| 28.9.2023 | $0.438 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$17.95
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$19.92
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+11.0%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $138.47M | $127.04M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $149.73M | $126.02M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $159.08M | $122.84M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $166.04M | $117.63M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $170.19M | $110.61M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$125.89M
Terminal Value
$2.68B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$1.74B
Enterprise Value
$2.35B
Net Debt
$525.50M
Equity Value
$1.82B
*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
$15.59
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$15.16
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 10 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 16 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
ChartMill · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 12.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.8.2026
ChartMill · 10.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 30.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.7.2026
Adamas Trust Inc. 7.000% Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock $0.01 par value per share (ADAMZ) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, 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.
ADAMZ currently scores 50/100 (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, ADAMZ's estimated fair value is $19.92, which is 11.0% above the current price of $17.95. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ADAMZ's technical score is 14/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $19.92 vs. price $17.95 (+11.0%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 196.5%; Free cash flow growth: 1290.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.04 (3y annualized return 0.8% / max drawdown 22.1%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — ADAMZ 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pendergast Lisa A | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Clement Michael B. | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Greenberg Audrey | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Norcutt Steven G | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Cheng Gena | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Mumma Steven R | Grant/Award from Employer | 19.6.2026 | 14,238 | +14,238 | — |
| Clement Michael B. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 18,678 | +18,678 | — |
| Clement Michael B. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 18,678 | -18,678 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.1.2026 | 5,827 | -5,827 | $8.41 |
| Nario-Eng Kristine Rimando | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.1.2026 | 751 | -751 | $8.41 |
| Mah Nicholas | Tax Withholding in Shares | 27.1.2026 | 2,237 | -2,237 | $8.41 |
| Mah Nicholas | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.1.2026 | 127,321 | +127,321 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.1.2026 | 216,711 | +216,711 | — |
| Nario-Eng Kristine Rimando | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.1.2026 | 61,989 | +61,989 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 84,737 | -84,737 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 41,032 | -41,032 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 34,179 | +34,179 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.1.2026 | 21,455 | -21,455 | $7.30 |
| Mah Nicholas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 24,414 | -24,414 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.1.2026 | 44,640 | -44,640 | $7.30 |
| Mah Nicholas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 48,948 | +48,948 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 84,737 | +84,737 | — |
| Serrano Jason T | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 41,032 | +41,032 | — |
| Mah Nicholas | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.1.2026 | 26,784 | -26,784 | $7.30 |
| Mah Nicholas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.1.2026 | 24,414 | +24,414 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,129 shares short as of 2026-07-31 · vs. 1,151 on 2026-07-15
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
21.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 35.0% 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