Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$54.31
▲ $4.08 (+8.1%)
Market data updated: 09/21 08:03 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/21/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$49.84 - $54.93
52-Week Range
$12.50 - $79.08
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
Support
$35.20
Resistance
$77.57
BAND is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+209.6% (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
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -1.9% (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
54
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
40
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
87
Risk
42
Sentiment
62
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 **Bandwidth Inc.** has centered on its strong financial performance and strategic partnerships. The company reported robust revenue growth in voice and messaging services, secured an exclusive infrastructure deal with **Salesforce**, and raised its full-year outlook for revenue and profitability. Investors have reacted positively, with the stock surging over 240% year-to-date, though valuation concerns persist amid optimism. Additionally, Bandwidth announced the promotion of **Emily Harlan** to General Counsel and Secretary, marking a leadership transition.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bandwidth Inc.. News trend score: 62. Reason: 9 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
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
47
Fundamentals
23
Technical
87
Valuation
50
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 rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 (3M)
+3%
Market Narrative
66
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+26
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for BAND is dominated by **loss aversion**, as evidenced by the steep 3-month drawdown (-39.4%) and elevated trading volume (1.24x). While panic selling (43) and FOMO (4) are present, they are secondary to the reluctance to realize losses, a classic behavioral response in prolonged declines. The narrative gap (-15) further suggests investors may be underestimating the severity of the downturn relative to fundamentals. The key open question is whether the current volume spike reflects defensive positioning or a potential bottoming process—without a reversal in momentum or sentiment, loss aversion may persist.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 07:24 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"reporting robust revenue growth from its voice and messaging services"
"securing an exclusive infrastructure partnership with Salesforce"
"Bandwidth stock has delivered very strong gains year to date, yet the valuation checks currently lean expensive"
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 — 60/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 16/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing it as a cautiously favorable opportunity while others dismiss it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay, Howard Marks (Market Cycle), and Samuel Armstrong Nelson—all suggest the stock aligns with their principles, whether by lacking crowd mania, fitting a favorable cycle position, or avoiding overextension. In contrast, the lowest-rated frameworks—Jesse Livermore, Thorstein Veblen, and Benjamin Graham—reject it entirely, with Livermore flagging a negative trend, Veblen spotting speculative growth motives, and Graham deeming it too risky for his defensive standards. The middle ground, including Fisher, Lynch, and Bogle, leans neutral or negative, citing insufficient quality, growth, or efficiency to justify a long-term hold. The stark contrast reflects whether the methodology prioritizes cycle timing, risk tolerance, or fundamental strength.
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟢 68
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)
🟡 60
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)
🟡 42
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 41
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 40
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 39
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 34
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)
🔴 30
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 29
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 28
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 28
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 28
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)
🔴 28
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 26
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 16
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 0 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 clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High 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
39.1%
Operating Margin
-1.9%
Net Margin
-1.7%
EBITDA Margin
-1.9%
ROE
-3.2%
ROA
-1.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.43
Cash
$102.79M
Total Debt
$247.56M
Current Ratio
1.42
Debt/Equity
0.62
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$13.33
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$3.19
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 4 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Motley Fool · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 30.8.2026
Yahoo · 29.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 29.8.2026
Yahoo · 29.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 29.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Bandwidth Inc. (BAND) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
BAND currently scores 54/100 (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.
BAND's technical score is 87/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -1.9% (negative); Net margin: -1.7% (negative); ATR: 7.8% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BAND.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 21 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raiford Daryl E | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 3,291 | -3,291 | $49.97 |
| Ross Kade | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,096 | -2,096 | $47.54 |
| Ross Kade | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 753 | -753 | $49.29 |
| Ross Kade | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,151 | -1,151 | $48.50 |
| Raiford Daryl E | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 2,536 | -2,536 | $47.74 |
| Raiford Daryl E | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,400 | -1,400 | $48.99 |
| Krupka Devin M | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 3,074 | -3,074 | $48.97 |
| Raiford Daryl E | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,734 | -2,734 | $48.82 |
| Morken David A. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,128 | -2,128 | $49.60 |
| Morken David A. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | $48.82 |
| Agarwal Devesh | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,849 | -2,849 | $48.82 |
| Agarwal Devesh | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,020 | -2,020 | $49.60 |
| Raiford Daryl E | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 1,939 | -1,939 | $49.60 |
| Bottorff Rebecca | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 1,587 | -1,587 | $48.82 |
| Bottorff Rebecca | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 1,126 | -1,126 | $49.60 |
| Krupka Devin M | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 506 | -506 | $49.60 |
| Krupka Devin M | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 713 | -713 | $48.82 |
| Asbill Richard Brandon | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 1,072 | -1,072 | $48.82 |
| Ross Kade | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 671 | -671 | $49.60 |
| Ross Kade | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 945 | -945 | $48.82 |
| Asbill Richard Brandon | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 760 | -760 | $49.60 |
| Roush Lukas M. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 3,333 | -3,333 | — |
| Roush Lukas M. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 61,769 | +3,333 | — |
| Morken David A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 7,727 | -7,727 | — |
| Morken David A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 28.8.2026 | 4,103 | +4,103 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,362,879 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,428,510 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
60.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.5% 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