Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$0.58
▼ $0.01 (-2.5%)
Market data updated: 09/21 09:48 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/21/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
$84.64M
Day Range
$0.58 - $0.60
52-Week Range
$0.45 - $2.65
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$0.46
Resistance
$0.63
BLNK is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-57.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/28 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
🟡 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: 62.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -81.2% (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
68
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
51
Risk
34
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
28
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 of Blink Charging Co. highlights its stock performance amid broader sector trends. After ChargePoint reported stronger-than-expected earnings in early September 2026, Blink Charging’s shares surged **14.6%** on September 4, reflecting investor optimism in the EV charging infrastructure sector. While Blink’s stock moved in tandem with peers like EVgo, it lagged behind ChargePoint’s dramatic gains, which surged **74%** the prior day. The focus remains on sector momentum and financial results rather than company-specific developments.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Blink Charging Co.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
46
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
44
Psychology
53
Fundamentals
28
Technical
51
Valuation
50
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price (3M)
-8%
Market Narrative
85
Fundamental Reality
44
Narrative Gap
+41
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
BLNK’s psychology is fragmented, with **FOMO** (26) and **Confirmation Bias** (20) leading, but **Loss Aversion** (12) and **Euphoria** (13) also present. The narrative gap (+15) suggests investors prioritize optimism over weak fundamentals (flat revenue, modest margin gains), while elevated volume and momentum fuel speculative buying. The key tension lies between short-term momentum-driven behavior and lingering skepticism from the recent decline. Whether this remains a FOMO-driven rally or shifts toward loss-averse profit-taking hinges on whether volume sustains or sentiment cools.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:21 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Shares of EV charging infrastructure provider Blink Charging (NASDAQ:BLNK) jumped 14.6% after peer ChargePoint reported better-than-expected results (Articles 5, 6)"
"ChargePoint just posted one of the sharpest single-session surges in its history (Article 7) / CEO calls rally ‘the beginning of the momentum’ (Articles 1, 2)"
"lifting investor sentiment across the broader EV charging sector (Articles 3, 5)"
📈 8D 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
Benjamin Graham — 69/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 17/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies for BLNK split sharply between cautious optimism and outright skepticism, reflecting deep philosophical divides in investing. Value-oriented thinkers like Charles Mackay and Benjamin Graham (both traditional and enterprising) see *some* merit—Mackay detects no crowd-driven mania, while Graham acknowledges a modest discount—but neither finds a slam-dunk bargain. Meanwhile, growth-focused investors like Peter Lynch and Thorstein Veblen lean positive, though Lynch notes the price may already embed most of its upside, while Veblen sees value creation. In contrast, cyclical and contrarian voices like Howard Marks (market cycle) and Samuel Nelson flag the stock as mid-cycle or overbought, while technical traders like Jesse Livermore and Gerald Loeb warn of downside risks, with Loeb’s risk-averse stance being the most critical. The divide underscores whether BLNK’s fundamentals justify its valuation (value/growth camp) or if it’s already priced for perfection (cyclical/contrarian camp).
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 69
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 66
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)
🟢 65
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 64
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 55
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 47
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 44
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)
🟡 39
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 32
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)
🔴 30
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)
🔴 23
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 19
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 17
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 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (5 bullish · 5 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.
Gross Margin
24.6%
Operating Margin
-81.2%
Net Margin
-80.5%
EBITDA Margin
-76.5%
ROE
-129.3%
ROA
-56.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.76
Cash
$39.57M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.41
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$0.58
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$9.49
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-50.71M | $-46.52M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-60.53M | $-50.95M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-68.85M | $-53.17M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-74.45M | $-52.74M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-76.31M | $-49.60M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-40.56M
Terminal Value
$-1.20B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-782.09M
Enterprise Value
$-1.04B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.04B
*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
$0.59
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.51
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
StockStory · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
StockStory · 24.8.2026
Blink Charging Co. (BLNK) 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.
BLNK 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.
BLNK's technical score is 51/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: 62.0%; Free cash flow growth: 28.7%; Net income growth: 58.6%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -81.2% (negative); Net margin: -80.5% (negative); ATR: 5.4% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BLNK.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schemm Dennis Charles | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.7.2026 | 260,558 | +260,558 | — |
| Schemm Dennis Charles | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.7.2026 | 260,558 | +260,558 | — |
| van Montfrans Ritsaart J.M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 97,165 | -97,165 | $0.61 |
| van Montfrans Ritsaart J.M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 455,732 | -97,165 | $0.61 |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 575,352 | +575,352 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 3,758 | -3,758 | $0.68 |
| Bercovich Michael | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 9,709 | -9,709 | $0.65 |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 205,357 | +205,357 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 769,366 | +769,366 | — |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 64,904 | +64,904 | — |
| LEVINE JACK | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 238,550 | +238,550 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 93,496 | +93,496 | — |
| van Montfrans Ritsaart J.M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 286,260 | +286,260 | — |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 302,817 | +302,817 | — |
| Moller Glen | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 238,550 | +238,550 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 205,357 | +205,357 | — |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 64,904 | +64,904 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 404,930 | +404,930 | — |
| Battaglia Michael C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 32,993 | -32,993 | $0.65 |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 69,919 | +69,919 | — |
| Bercovich Michael | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 26,147 | -26,147 | $0.61 |
| LEVINE JACK | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 445,529 | +238,550 | — |
| Moller Glen | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 285,557 | +238,550 | — |
| van Montfrans Ritsaart J.M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 552,897 | +286,260 | — |
| Bercovich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 295,421 | +64,904 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,815,195 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 17,089,610 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.6% 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