Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$0.85
▼ $0.01 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/23 12:20 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/22/2026
News analyzed: 09/23/2026
Market Cap
$10.65M
Day Range
$0.83 - $0.89
52-Week Range
$0.69 - $1.62
Beta
—
Next Earnings
16.12.2026
Support
$0.80
Resistance
$1.30
BLIN is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-36.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.03
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$1.27 vs. price $0.85 (-250.6%)
Fair Value
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
35
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
34
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
10
Risk
32
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
30
Institutional
100
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 Bridgeline Digital, Inc. (NASDAQ: BLIN) has centered on its HawkSearch platform, highlighting its adoption by major clients across industries. Key themes include enterprise search solutions winning competitive evaluations for advanced personalization, AI-driven product discovery, and scalability—particularly in automotive, industrial, and eCommerce sectors. The company also reported expanded use cases, such as a long-time customer shifting from CMS to HawkSearch and a leading retailer scaling hybrid search and AI shopping tools. Financial updates from Q3 2026 earnings emphasized core product growth as a driver.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bridgeline Digital, Inc.. News trend score: 92. Reason: 9 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
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
69
Fundamentals
30
Technical
10
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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).
Price (3M)
-18%
Market Narrative
49
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
BLIN’s dominant herding behavior reflects passive alignment with peers (-3.9% avg) rather than aggressive action, consistent with a cautious market environment. The narrative-reality gap (17) hints at a disconnect where optimism (54) outpaces tangible fundamentals (37), but subdued volume (0.65x avg) and low volatility (0.86x ATR) temper extreme bias. Loss aversion (58) and anchoring (35) suggest traders may hold near support (3.2% above) rather than force liquidation. The key question: *Will the gap widen with new catalysts, or will herding persist as a stabilizing force?*
Updated: 09/07/2026, 04:42 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"an industrial filtration supplier has selected HawkSearch to enhance product discovery"
"HawkSearch following a competitive evaluation of enterprise search solutions"
"Longstanding Bridgeline customer expands from CMS to HawkSearch AI Search"
"Core Product Growth Drives [Q3 2026] Earnings Call Highlights"
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 99/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those who see potential in BLIN’s technical or cyclical positioning and those who dismiss it as either overvalued, risky, or fundamentally inconsistent with their core principles. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score and favorable cycle verdict contrast sharply with Philip Fisher’s lowest score, as Fisher’s quality-focused approach clashes with BLIN’s lack of the signature traits he demanded—like long-term growth and managerial excellence. Meanwhile, Howard Marks’ mixed verdict (55) and his cycle-based take (78) suggest he sees merit in the stock’s position but worries about inflated expectations, while Benjamin Graham’s lower scores (68 and 34) reflect his stricter valuation thresholds. On the other end, investors like Jesse Livermore (36) and Walter Bagehot (35) flag red flags around trend alignment and liquidity, while the efficient-market camp (38) and Morgan Housel (31) question whether the stock’s volatility or lack of edge justifies active selection over passive strategies.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 77
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
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)
🟢 70
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 53
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 38
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 37
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 35
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)
🔴 33
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 30
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 22
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 11
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
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
Based on the last 283 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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 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
66.6%
Operating Margin
-15.8%
Net Margin
-16.4%
EBITDA Margin
-10.7%
ROE
-26.3%
ROA
-16.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.25
Cash
$1.63M
Total Debt
$326.00K
Current Ratio
0.70
Debt/Equity
0.03
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$0.85
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$1.27
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-250.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-2.9%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -2.9% | $-1.09M | $-999.48K |
| 2 | -1.6% | $-1.07M | $-902.72K |
| 3 | -0.2% | $-1.07M | $-826.52K |
| 4 | 1.1% | $-1.08M | $-766.99K |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-1.11M | $-721.25K |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-1.12M
Terminal Value
$-17.50M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-11.37M
Enterprise Value
$-15.59M
Net Debt
$-1.30M
Equity Value
$-14.29M
*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
$0.85
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.18
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 9 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 27.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 25.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 20.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 18.8.2026
Motley Fool · 14.8.2026
Moby · 14.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 14.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 11.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 23.7.2026
Bridgeline Digital, Inc. (BLIN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 35/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
BLIN currently scores 35/100 (Weak) 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, BLIN's estimated fair value is -$1.27, which is 250.6% below the current price of $0.85. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BLIN's technical score is 10/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.03; Gross margin: 66.6% — strong; Debt/equity: 0.03.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$1.27 vs. price $0.85 (-250.6%); Operating margin: -15.8% (negative); Net margin: -16.4% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BLIN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 18 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 10.3.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $0.93 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 10.3.2026 | 1,773,736 | +10,000 | $0.93 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 3.3.2026 | 4,472 | +4,472 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 3.3.2026 | 493,842 | +4,472 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 2.3.2026 | 2,487 | +2,487 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 2.3.2026 | 489,370 | +2,487 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 25.2.2026 | 10,647 | +10,647 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 25.2.2026 | 486,883 | +10,647 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 24.2.2026 | 2,394 | +2,394 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 24.2.2026 | 476,236 | +2,394 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 19.2.2026 | 1,353 | +1,353 | $0.85 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 19.2.2026 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $0.85 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 19.2.2026 | 1,763,736 | +5,000 | $0.85 |
| Ketslakh Michael | Open Market Purchase | 19.2.2026 | 473,842 | +1,353 | $0.85 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 18.2.2026 | 14,000 | +14,000 | $0.82 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 18.2.2026 | 1,758,736 | +14,000 | $0.82 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 17.2.2026 | 35,301 | +35,301 | $0.75 |
| Kahn Roger E. | Open Market Purchase | 17.2.2026 | 1,744,736 | +35,301 | $0.75 |
| Windhausen Thomas R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.1.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Ross Brandon | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.1.2026 | 7,583 | -7,583 | $0.82 |
| KAHN JONI | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.1.2026 | 22,500 | +22,500 | — |
| Kahn Roger E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.1.2026 | 300,000 | +300,000 | $0.82 |
| KAHN JONI | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.1.2026 | 7,252 | -7,252 | $0.82 |
| Ross Brandon | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.1.2026 | 22,500 | +22,500 | — |
| Ketslakh Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.1.2026 | 22,500 | +22,500 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
57,210 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 92,512 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
27.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 36.5% 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