Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$34.55
▼ $0.37 (-1.1%)
Market data updated: 09/17 09:02 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$1.34B
Day Range
$34.10 - $35.17
52-Week Range
$14.97 - $37.22
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
AMN is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+80.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/30 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $61.17 vs. price $34.55 (+77.0%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -2.0% (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
55
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
54
Quality
42
Value
62
Momentum
77
Risk
26
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
23
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 **AMN Healthcare Services Inc.** highlights its strong stock performance, driven by a **59.3% surge in six months**, reaching **$33.44 per share**. The company’s gains align with broader trends in **commercial staffing stocks**, which have risen over **80% in 2026** amid job market uncertainty and increased reliance on temporary hires. Analysts note its potential as a **small-cap "hidden gem"** despite market volatility risks. No company-specific operational or financial details beyond stock performance are mentioned.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about AMN Healthcare Services Inc. News trend score: 80. Reason: 7 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
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
23
Technical
77
Valuation
62
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.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+11%
Market Narrative
44
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a **narrative-driven disconnect**—positive sentiment (98/100) and a +10 narrative gap fuel confirmation bias, while technicals (neutral RSI, muted volatility) and valuation (-45% vs DCF) undermine euphoria. The lack of dominant state implies indecision: investors may cling to optimism despite weak momentum and stagnant fundamentals. The key question is whether the narrative gap will widen further or collapse under fundamental reality. Low herding and anchoring signals imply no clear momentum catalyst is emerging.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:09 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"The company’s stock price has jumped 59.3%, hitting $33.44 per share."
"Staffing agencies ... AMN Healthcare Services ... are all up more than 100% in 2026."
"AMN Healthcare Services (AMN) Price Target Increased by 18.01% to 36.28"
📈 3D 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
Jesse Livermore — 52/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 4/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those seeing *relative* opportunity and those flagging outright risks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay, both attuned to crowd psychology and cyclical positioning, find the stock’s oversold condition and growing excitement as reasons to lean in, while the efficient-market camp (Malkiel/Bogle) remains skeptical, arguing the stock’s merits aren’t strong enough to justify active picking. Meanwhile, the more fundamentalists—like Graham, Fisher, and Loeb—dismiss it outright, either because it fails their valuation tests or lacks the quality/growth traits they demand. On the other end, trend-followers like Livermore and Marks (cycle) see it as a late-stage or counter-trend play, while volatility-averse thinkers like Housel and Smith warn of instability or patient-investor traps. The divide isn’t just between bulls and bears, but between those who prioritize timing, sentiment, or cyclicality and those who demand structural strength or statistical safety.
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟢 66
A real, well-supported case — deviating from a broad index may be justified here
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 52
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 49
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 46
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 40
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 36
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 22
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)
🔴 20
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 17
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 13
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 13
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 6
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 4
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
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 1 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$30.17
Range Bottom
$37.22
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
28.3%
Operating Margin
-2.0%
Net Margin
-3.5%
EBITDA Margin
3.7%
ROE
-14.9%
ROA
-4.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$2.48
Cash
$33.97M
Total Debt
$767.05M
Current Ratio
0.94
Debt/Equity
1.19
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$34.55
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$61.17
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+77.0%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $222.14M | $203.80M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $215.19M | $181.13M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $212.50M | $164.09M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $213.83M | $151.48M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $219.18M | $142.45M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$233.83M
Terminal Value
$3.46B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.25B
Enterprise Value
$3.09B
Net Debt
$733.08M
Equity Value
$2.36B
*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
$16.67
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$10.31
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 11 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
StockStory · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
StockStory · 2.9.2026
AMN Healthcare Services Inc (AMN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 55/100, 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.
AMN currently scores 55/100 (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, AMN's estimated fair value is $61.17, which is 77.0% above the current price of $34.55. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AMN's technical score is 77/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $61.17 vs. price $34.55 (+77.0%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 35.6%; Net income growth: 34.9%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -2.0% (negative); Net margin: -3.5% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AMN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FOLETTA MARK G | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 17,917 | -2,000 | $31.07 |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 19,917 | -1,681 | $31.07 |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 2,000 | -2,000 | $31.07 |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 1,681 | -1,681 | $31.07 |
| Trent-Adams Sylvia | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
| Huber Celia P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| Jones Daphne E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
| Caballero Jorge A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| Trent-Adams Sylvia | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| Caballero Jorge A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 15,462 | +8,325 | — |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
| Caballero Jorge A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
| Trent-Adams Sylvia | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 16,797 | +8,325 | — |
| Jones Daphne E | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| Jones Daphne E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 17,124 | +8,325 | — |
| HARRIS R JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 67,262 | +8,325 | — |
| FOLETTA MARK G | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 21,598 | +8,325 | — |
| HARRIS R JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 72,817 | +5,555 | — |
| HARRIS R JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
| Palmer Eric P | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| HARRIS R JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 76,865 | +4,048 | — |
| Jones Daphne E | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 8,304 | +8,304 | — |
| HARRIS R JEFFREY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 102,000 | +9,563 | — |
| Jones Daphne E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.5.2026 | 0 | -8,325 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,419,996 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,398,700 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
68.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.4% 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