Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$559.82
▲ $14.73 (+2.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:35 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$913.89B
Day Range
$541.54 - $559.91
52-Week Range
$154.78 - $584.73
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$424.03
Resistance
$574.20
AMD is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+254.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 20/32 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 34.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $86.41 vs. price $559.82 (-84.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (82/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
84/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
+17.3%
Median 40D Outcome
0/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
53%
+13.6% … +40.6%
🟡 Base
7%
+0.1% … +0.1%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-11.3% … -3.9%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 10 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 53% (95% CI 30%–75%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +8.7%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
15 occurrence(s) · 53% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.4% | -3.9% … +5.9% | +0.8% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +4.3% | -9.4% … +14.2% | +1.4% |
| 20D | 53% (30%–75%) | +8.7% | -5.6% … +24.4% | +1.9% |
| 40D | 60% (36%–80%) | +17.3% | -10.4% … +22.6% | +4.8% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -1.4% | -8.5% … +29.2% | +9.1% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-26 | 84/100 | Uptrend | -14.9% | +20.8% |
| 2019-06-07 | 83/100 | High Volatility | -1.1% | -4.7% |
| 2023-05-17 | 82/100 | Uptrend | +19.7% | +7.9% |
| 2020-07-23 | 81/100 | Uptrend | +38.9% | +39.6% |
| 2020-12-02 | 81/100 | Uptrend | -2.2% | -10.3% |
| 2019-11-06 | 80/100 | Uptrend | +10.3% | +37.6% |
| 2021-10-27 | 79/100 | Uptrend | +29.0% | -4.7% |
| 2018-08-07 | 79/100 | High Volatility | +45.8% | -6.9% |
| 2021-11-12 | 78/100 | Uptrend | -9.5% | -10.2% |
| 2021-07-02 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +14.7% | +7.2% |
| 2018-06-14 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +0.1% | +83.9% |
| 2024-01-18 | 77/100 | Uptrend | +8.7% | -1.4% |
| 2026-04-10 | 77/100 | ✓ Uptrend | +85.8% | +111.2% |
| 2023-06-14 | 76/100 | High Volatility | -8.9% | -17.3% |
| 2024-03-05 | 75/100 | High Volatility | -11.9% | -18.7% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLK (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
66
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
3d ago · $512.50
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 13 to 42 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
3d ago · $518.96
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 61)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
3d ago · $504.20
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 5 to 31 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
5d ago · $516.13
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 48 to 23 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
9d ago · $521.10
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 65)
What happened after
10d ago · $505.74
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 15 to 41 day-over-day
What happened after
28d ago · $473.25
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
28d ago · $473.25
Evidence: 2 bullish / 8 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
31d ago · $466.42
Evidence: -3.0pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
31d ago · $484.39
Evidence: המניה במגמת ירידה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
31d ago · $484.39
Evidence: 4 bullish / 4 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
32d ago · $481.64
Evidence: -3.2pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
32d ago · $478.86
Evidence: -4.6pp vs. sector average today
What happened after
32d ago · $478.86
Evidence: attention score 65/100
What happened after
32d ago · $478.86
Evidence: 6 bullish / 4 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 18, 2026
Then
64
$479.84
Now
66
$559.82
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
82
Quality
47
Value
33
Momentum
88
Risk
54
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
67
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING AMD...
Recent media coverage of AMD has centered on its AI-focused innovations and market positioning amid broader semiconductor sector volatility. The company gained attention for unveiling a high-end, $100,000-plus AI workstation set for 2027, which drove a stock surge. However, analysts remain divided, with some expressing concerns over valuation and market sentiment, while others argue AMD’s long-term potential—particularly in AI and data center chips—could justify a significant stock rebound. The broader chip market’s uncertainty, including shifts in investor focus away from AI-heavy stocks, also shaped discussions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Advanced Micro Devices. News trend score: 56. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 7 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
59
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
73
Fundamentals
67
Technical
88
Valuation
33
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental 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 is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+4%
Market Narrative
82
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+44
🔀 Weak-Conviction Rally
Price is moving, but not accompanied by a matching rise in news attention/sentiment.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
AMD’s psychology score (46) and dominant **Overconfidence** suggest traders are overestimating its growth potential relative to fundamentals, amplified by a 485% premium over DCF. The **Euphoria** score (38) further reflects detached pricing from intrinsic value, while **FOMO** (15) remains muted despite positive momentum. The **narrative gap** (41) widens reality (38) from narrative (79), indicating traders may be prioritizing hype over fundamentals. The key question: *Will traders reassess valuation when momentum stalls or fundamentals fail to justify the premium?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 07:36 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"AMD just crushed its AI earnings and the stock dropped anyway, leaving investors staring at a stock that may be deeply mispriced heading into 2027."
"Nvidia, Microsoft at Center of $7 Trillion AI Boom — An unprecedented construction wave could reshape AI's biggest stock-market winners"
"ARK's latest trades show a shift toward space and financial technology while trimming several of its high-profile AI holdings."
"AMD Stock Jumps After Unveiling $100,000-Plus AI Workstation for 2027"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 21D 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
Walter Bagehot — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 5/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Walter Bagehot's documented focus on liquidity, the model estimates a very high score of 93, indicating strong resilience, while Graham's defensive criteria produce a low score around 30, reflecting valuation and safety concerns. Growth‑oriented investors like Peter Lynch and Philip Fisher assign moderate to high scores (72 and 68) because they see upside potential, yet traders such as Jesse Livermore and Jack Schwager find no clear trend or setup, resulting in lower scores (67 and 26). The efficient‑market view and Howard Marks emphasize mixed or late‑cycle risk, aligning with scores in the low 40s, and Thorstein Veblen and Samuel Armstrong Nelson flag overbought or uncertain profit translation, pulling scores into the 40‑50 range. These divergent outcomes stem from each methodology’s weighting of liquidity, growth, valuation, and market‑cycle factors.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 93
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 72
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 68
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 67
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)
🟡 63
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)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 58
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 49
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 39
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 30
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
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 25
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 5
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (10 bullish · 1 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 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
49.5%
Operating Margin
10.7%
Net Margin
12.5%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
6.9%
ROA
5.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.67
Cash
$5.54B
Total Debt
$3.22B
Current Ratio
2.85
Debt/Equity
0.05
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$559.82
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$86.41
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-84.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
14.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 14.7% | $7.73B | $7.09B |
| 2 | 11.7% | $8.63B | $7.26B |
| 3 | 8.6% | $9.37B | $7.23B |
| 4 | 5.6% | $9.89B | $7.01B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $10.14B | $6.59B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$6.74B
Terminal Value
$159.83B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$103.88B
Enterprise Value
$139.06B
Net Debt
$-2.32B
Equity Value
$141.37B
*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
$38.65
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$28.40
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 5 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 66/100, 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.
AMD currently scores 66/100 (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, AMD's estimated fair value is $86.41, which is 84.6% below the current price of $559.82. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AMD's technical score is 88/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 34.3%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 165.0%; Free cash flow growth: 180.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $86.41 vs. price $559.82 (-84.6%); Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.3% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AMD.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 23 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 171,766 | -2,513 | $472.39 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 175,079 | -900 | $470.13 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 174,279 | -800 | $471.14 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 169,439 | -2,327 | $473.43 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 165,608 | -3,831 | $474.43 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 164,179 | -1,429 | $475.70 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 161,079 | -3,100 | $476.53 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 160,979 | -100 | $477.84 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 3,100 | -3,100 | $476.53 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 3,831 | -3,831 | $474.43 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 900 | -900 | $470.13 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 2,513 | -2,513 | $472.39 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 800 | -800 | $471.14 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 2,327 | -2,327 | $473.43 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 1,429 | -1,429 | $475.70 |
| Hu Jean X. | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 100 | -100 | $477.84 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 384,017 | -2,312 | $456.49 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 375,906 | -600 | $466.26 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 386,329 | -2,125 | $455.62 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 377,961 | -321 | $464.27 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 381,713 | -400 | $458.26 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 24.8.2026 | 14,523 | -7,261 | — |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 380,083 | -1,630 | $459.68 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 24.8.2026 | 390,578 | +7,261 | $84.85 |
| Norrod Forrest Eugene | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 373,317 | -2,589 | $468.14 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
41,712,630 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 37,752,132 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.9% 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