Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$75.09
▲ $2.36 (+3.2%)
Market data updated: 09/18 05:01 AM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$74.31 - $75.27
52-Week Range
$43.26 - $81.85
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+63.0% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 3/13 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
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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.
ARTY exhibits a nuanced technical and risk profile, with its **investorScore of 73** and **STRONG** rating driven primarily by its positive momentum and relative outperformance. The stock’s price remains firmly above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, signaling sustained bullish momentum, while the **RSI of 58.5** and **3-month outperformance of +5.4%** relative to the index further reinforce its technical strength. However, the **negative MACD histogram** and **price below the SAR point** introduce conflicting signals, suggesting potential short-term downtrend pressures, and the **%K at 98.9** indicates overbought conditions that could trigger a pullback. Meanwhile, the **news category scores a perfect 100**, reflecting a predominantly positive narrative around AI, crypto, and growth sectors—key themes likely aligning with ARTY’s exposure—though the neutral tone of one article introduces a minor counterbalance. On the risk front, the **Calmar ratio of 1.02** (with a 3-year annualized return of 33.0% and a max drawdown of 32.4%) highlights volatility sensitivity, while the **ATR of 2.6%** underscores moderate price fluctuation, which may deter risk-averse investors. The overall score reflects a stock with compelling momentum and thematic tailwinds but tempered by technical contradictions and inherent volatility risks.
The stock shows strong bullish positioning with prices above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, supported by positive RSI (58.5) and recent outperformance (+5.4% vs. index). However, conflicting signals include a negative MACD histogram and overbought %K (98.9), alongside the price sitting below the SAR point, which may indicate short-term downtrend risks.
Technical alignment with moving averages and momentum indicators is critical for validating long-term trends, while overbought conditions and MACD divergence could signal impending reversals or consolidation.
All five news items are either positive or neutral, with a strong emphasis on AI, crypto, and growth sector themes—key drivers likely tied to ARTY’s business or sector exposure. Only one article carries a neutral tone, while the rest frame the market in a constructive light.
A uniformly positive news environment can bolster investor confidence and justify higher valuations, though neutral or mixed sentiment may introduce cautiousness about future catalysts.
The stock exhibits high volatility, as evidenced by a **Calmar ratio of 1.02** (indicating a 1:1 return-to-drawdown ratio) and a **3-year max drawdown of 32.4%**, despite a strong annualized return of 33.0%. The ATR of 2.6% further confirms moderate daily price swings.
High volatility and drawdown sensitivity make the stock riskier for conservative investors, while the Calmar ratio suggests that while returns are strong, they come with significant drawdown risks that could erode gains.
StockIQ conclusion
ARTY demonstrates a balanced profile with strong technical momentum and thematic support from recent news, but its score is tempered by conflicting technical signals and inherent volatility risks. The stock’s price alignment with key moving averages and positive RSI suggest underlying strength, while the negative MACD and overbought conditions introduce caution. High volatility and drawdown sensitivity further underscore the need for risk management. Investors should monitor the MACD and SAR dynamics closely, as well as broader market trends in AI and crypto, to assess whether the current momentum persists or reverses.
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
56
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
39
Risk
50
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
No data available
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 on the iShares Future AI & Tech ETF has centered on the accelerating integration of AI and technology into global markets, with a focus on infrastructure investments, sector dynamics, and evolving economic trends. Key themes include the massive capital outlays for AI data centers, the rising prominence of semiconductors and tech stocks, growing adoption of advanced AI systems like agentic AI in finance, and shifting investor scrutiny amid market volatility. Analysts also highlight macroeconomic signals, such as capital formation cycles and uneven growth, particularly in Europe.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about iShares Future AI & Tech ETF. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 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
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
34
Fundamentals
—
Technical
39
Valuation
—
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.
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)
-8%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+11
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s euphoric state—backed by strong momentum, extreme bullish sentiment, and a 27% premium over long-term averages—suggests investors are ignoring valuation gaps. Anchoring near resistance (3% away) may reinforce overbought behavior, while FOMO fuels further participation. The key question: will traders exit at resistance or double down? Narrative-reality divergence (68 vs. 50) hints at detached optimism, but no clear trigger for correction is visible yet.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 12:42 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"hundreds of billions in corporate borrowing are piling up to finance a gargantuan AI data center infrastructure buildout"
"more than half (52%) of respondents are already piloting agentic AI or are at more advanced deployment stages"
"semiconductors’ newfound prominence... given the importance of chips, memory and equipment suppliers to the AI infrastructure build-out"
"winners are beginning to separate amongst supply constraints"
📈 10D Investor Psychology
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 85/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some approaches treating it as a neutral or even speculative play while others outright dismiss it as risky or overvalued. The highest-scoring models—Edgar Lawrence Smith (100) and the Efficient Market proponents (59)—suggest it could be a niche case for dividend-focused or passive investors, though Smith’s verdict highlights a lack of data, and Malkiel/Bogle’s cautious score reflects weak evidence for active outperformance. Meanwhile, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, and Bagehot all default to 'not enough data' (50), signaling that fundamental or balance-sheet analysis lacks clarity, leaving their models unable to form a definitive opinion. On the other end, the most bearish frameworks—like Schwager (20), Nelson (19), and Marks’ cycle analysis (18)—flag it as either a poor technical setup or a late-stage speculative bubble, while Livermore (42) and Mackay (40) warn of trend reversals or crowd-driven delusions. The contrast underscores whether this stock is a speculative gamble (for those like Smith or Malkiel) or a red flag for disciplined, data-driven investors.
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 85
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 56
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 52
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
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: 0%
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%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ 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
🟡 50
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: 0%
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 49
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 37
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 36
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 18
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 275 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 7 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.
Low 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.6.2026 | $0.043 |
| 17.12.2024 | $0.070 |
| 11.6.2024 | $0.118 |
| 20.12.2023 | $0.150 |
| 7.6.2023 | $0.153 |
| 13.12.2022 | $0.057 |
| 9.6.2022 | $0.135 |
| 13.12.2021 | $0.912 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 6 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 7.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.8.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for iShares Future AI & Tech ETF (ARTY) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for ARTY specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
ARTY's technical score is 39/100, 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; CMF 20 days: 0.10.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; -6.0% over the last 3 months relative to the index; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend.
Yes — ARTY 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 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
304,786 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 249,344 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 63.7% 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