Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$25.10
▼ $0.06 (-0.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 04:08 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$582.69M
Day Range
$25.04 - $25.23
52-Week Range
$23.52 - $25.84
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+0.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/14 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
Insiders
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 53.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.26 (3y annualized return 1.5% / max drawdown 5.9%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
73/100
Similarity
6
Historical Matches
68/100
Analog Quality
+0.4%
Median 40D Outcome
90/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
50%
+1.8% … +2.4%
🟡 Base
33%
-0.6% … +0.2%
🔴 Bearish
17%
-3.1% … -3.1%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 6 similar historical cases for this stock, 50% (95% CI 19%–81%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.9%.
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 | 33% (10%–70%) | -0.1% | -1.6% … +1.0% | +0.1% |
| 10D | 50% (19%–81%) | +0.2% | -1.6% … +1.6% | +0.1% |
| 20D | 50% (19%–81%) | +0.9% | -0.6% … +2.1% | +0.2% |
| 40D | 33% (10%–70%) | +0.4% | -0.6% … +1.6% | +0.4% |
| 60D | 17% (3%–56%) | +0.3% | -0.4% … +0.9% | +0.5% |
Sample size: 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-23 | 73/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +2.4% | +1.1% |
| 2026-03-16 | 64/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.5% | -0.4% |
| 2026-06-08 | 57/100 | Consolidation | +1.2% | +0.9% |
| 2026-04-07 | 56/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +2.5% | +0.8% |
| 2026-05-13 | 55/100 | Consolidation | -3.1% | -0.5% |
| 2026-04-29 | 47/100 | Consolidation | -0.9% | -0.1% |
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.
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.
AOMD’s **Moderate** investor score of 49 reflects a mixed but cautiously optimistic profile, where growth and valuation metrics partially offset technical and risk-related weaknesses. The company demonstrates strong earnings momentum, with **53.8% EPS growth** and **53.1% net income growth**, positioning it as a high-growth candidate. However, technical indicators show weakness, with the stock trading below both the **50-day and 200-day moving averages**, despite a positive MACD histogram suggesting rising momentum. Valuation appears reasonable at a **P/E of 14.0**, though the stock’s underperformance relative to its index (-2.4% over three months) and below-average technical readings introduce caution. Fundamental quality is undermined by high leverage (debt/equity of **8.51**) and weak ROA (1.6%), while risk metrics—including a **Calmar ratio of 0.27** and volatility (ATR 0.5%)—highlight potential instability. The absence of news data further limits clarity, leaving the stock’s trajectory dependent on future earnings confirmation and market sentiment shifts.
The stock trades below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, with an RSI of 45.0 (neutral) and %K at 44.4, despite a positive MACD histogram indicating rising momentum.
This suggests short-term weakness but potential for a rebound if momentum sustains, though current positioning remains cautious.
ROE is reasonable at 16.5%, but ROA is weak at 1.6%, and the debt-to-equity ratio is high at 8.51, indicating leverage risk.
High leverage could strain profitability if earnings growth slows or interest rates rise, impacting long-term stability.
EPS and net income growth are both strong at 53.8% and 53.1%, respectively, signaling robust revenue or cost efficiencies.
Sustained growth could justify higher valuations, but execution risk remains if margins compress or competition intensifies.
The P/E of 14.0 is below median sector peers, but NAV per share ($11.00) suggests potential undervaluation if growth materializes.
A lower P/E may attract value investors, but growth must outpace expectations to justify the current discount.
No recent news data is available, leaving sentiment and catalysts ambiguous.
Lack of transparency could obscure risks or opportunities, making external factors critical for future performance.
High debt-to-equity (8.51) raises financial health concerns, though no other quality metrics (e.g., profitability trends) are provided.
Leverage could amplify volatility or force cost-cutting if earnings decline, impacting operational flexibility.
The Calmar ratio (0.27) indicates poor risk-adjusted returns, and ATR (0.5%) suggests moderate volatility, while high debt exacerbates leverage risk.
Investors should monitor drawdown resilience and interest rate sensitivity as key risk factors.
StockIQ conclusion
AOMD presents a **Moderate** profile driven by strong earnings growth but is weighed down by technical weakness, high leverage, and poor risk-adjusted returns. While the stock’s valuation (P/E 14.0) and momentum (positive MACD) offer potential upside, concerns over debt sustainability and short-term underperformance create caution. Investors should focus on earnings confirmation and debt management as key drivers of future performance, with risks amplified by external factors like interest rates and sector trends.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
66
Quality
No data available
Value
50
Momentum
34
Risk
50
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
50
Institutional
50
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.
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
2
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
87
Fundamentals
50
Technical
34
Valuation
50
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.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+1%
Market Narrative
44
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-6
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixating on the 0.7% support level, likely due to its proximity. Herding is present but muted, as the stock underperforms peers while volume remains elevated, indicating selective participation rather than blind following. The narrative gap (-5) hints at a slight disconnect between market sentiment and fundamentals, but no extreme bias (e.g., euphoria or panic) is observable. The key question is whether traders will break or hold near support, as anchoring often persists until a clear trigger emerges.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 07:44 PM
What could change this?
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 35/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for AOMD reflects deep methodological disagreements about valuation, growth potential, and risk tolerance. Charles Mackay’s near-perfect score suggests the stock lacks crowd-driven mania, while Peter Lynch’s high score implies it’s a growth stock undervalued relative to its potential—both signaling opportunity. In contrast, Benjamin Graham’s low scores and Walter Bagehot’s zero indicate the stock fails core defensive and balance-sheet criteria, raising red flags for value-focused investors. Meanwhile, mixed signals from Howard Marks, Thorstein Veblen, and Philip Fisher highlight uncertainty about whether the company’s growth translates to sustainable profits or if expectations are already inflated. The contrast between Lynch’s enthusiasm and Graham’s skepticism underscores whether AOMD is a speculative bet or a fundamentally sound investment.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 100
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 100
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 95
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 76
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 71
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 69
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 53
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 46
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 43
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 38
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 35
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
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 6 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 trading range, but the picture isn't yet clear enough on the likely direction.
Low confidence
$24.94
Range Bottom
$25.66
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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
—
ROA
—
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.85
Cash
$41.62M
Total Debt
$2.28B
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 14.8.2026 | $0.609 |
| 15.5.2026 | $0.609 |
| 13.2.2026 | $0.609 |
| 14.11.2025 | $0.609 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 0 positive, 0 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 0 articles.
No recent articles found for this stock.
Angel Oak Mortgage REIT, Inc. 9.750% Senior Notes due 2030 (AOMD) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, rated "Moderate" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
AOMD currently scores 48/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
AOMD's technical score is 34/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 53.8%; Net income growth: 53.1%; ATR: 0.4% of price.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.26 (3y annualized return 1.5% / max drawdown 5.9%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — AOMD 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 — 3 purchases and 3 sales out of the last 15 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Filson Brandon | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 82,024 | +82,024 | — |
| Filson Brandon | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 20,303 | +20,303 | $9.03 |
| MINAMI W D | Open Market Purchase | 22.5.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $8.15 |
| DAVIDSON KEMPNER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP | Disposition to the Company | 19.5.2026 | 1,794,353 | -1,794,353 | $8.36 |
| MINAMI W D | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 11,737 | +11,737 | $8.52 |
| Parsons Landon | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 11,737 | +11,737 | $8.52 |
| Savarese Noelle | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 11,737 | +11,737 | $8.52 |
| JONES CRAIG B | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 11,737 | +11,737 | $8.52 |
| Morgan Jonathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.5.2026 | 11,737 | +11,737 | $8.52 |
| DAVIDSON KEMPNER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP | Open Market Sale | 20.3.2026 | 481,537 | -481,537 | $7.87 |
| MINAMI W D | Open Market Purchase | 18.11.2025 | 3,441 | +3,441 | $8.32 |
| Filson Brandon | Open Market Sale | 17.9.2025 | 50,000 | -50,000 | $9.78 |
| Filson Brandon | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2025 | 25,290 | +25,290 | — |
| DAVIDSON KEMPNER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2025 | 595,000 | -595,000 | $9.75 |
| Morgan Jonathan | Open Market Purchase | 7.8.2025 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $9.03 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,254 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 217 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
50.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 66.5% 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