Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NASDAQ
$21.44
▼ $0.83 (-3.7%)
Market data updated: 09/16 01:24 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$447.99M
Day Range
$21.32 - $21.67
52-Week Range
$16.37 - $35.70
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
-34.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/18 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
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.37 (3y annualized return 19.7% / max drawdown 53.3%)
Risk
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.
BRRR’s **moderate overall score of 57** reflects a strong divergence between its robust technical performance and severe fundamental and growth challenges. The stock demonstrates clear bullish momentum, with prices well above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and an RSI of 67.5 indicating healthy upward momentum. However, the **%K at 88.8** signals overbought conditions, which could precede a pullback. On the other hand, the company’s fundamentals are deeply concerning: a **negative return on equity (-9.8%)** and **return on assets (-9.8%)** suggest severe inefficiency or losses, while **EPS and net income growth plummeted by -119.0% and -116.2%**, respectively, indicating a collapse in profitability. Valuation metrics are equally problematic, with a **negative P/E (-10.2)** and a low NAV per share ($22.35), which may reflect market skepticism or accounting distortions. News sentiment is mixed, with neutral coverage on Bitcoin volatility dominating, though one negative headline about 'hot money migration' hints at broader sector turbulence. Risk remains elevated, with a **Calmar ratio of 0.41**—a low volatility-adjusted return ratio—highlighting a historically volatile stock prone to extreme drawdowns (53.3% over three years).
The stock exhibits strong bullish momentum, with prices above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and an RSI of 67.5. However, the %K at 88.8 indicates overbought conditions, which may signal an imminent correction.
Technical strength suggests near-term upward pressure, but overbought signals could trigger a pullback, impacting investor sentiment.
The company has a **negative return on equity (-9.8%)** and **return on assets (-9.8%)**, indicating severe financial inefficiency or losses. These metrics are critical red flags for long-term viability.
Negative ROE and ROA suggest the company is not generating value from its assets, raising concerns about operational health and shareholder returns.
**EPS growth (-119.0%)** and **net income growth (-116.2%)** have collapsed, signaling a dramatic contraction in profitability and revenue streams.
Such extreme negative growth metrics imply fundamental challenges that could persist unless addressed, undermining investor confidence.
The **P/E ratio is negative (-10.2)**, and the NAV per share stands at $22.35, reflecting either market skepticism or accounting irregularities.
A negative P/E and low NAV per share suggest the stock is trading on speculative or distressed conditions rather than fundamentals.
News sentiment is **neutral overall**, with mixed coverage on Bitcoin volatility and one negative headline about capital flows. No material positive or negative catalysts emerge.
Neutral news sentiment implies no clear directional catalyst, leaving the stock’s trajectory dependent on technical or fundamental developments.
The **Calmar ratio is 0.41**, indicating high volatility relative to returns, with a **53.3% max drawdown over three years**. ATR is 2.7% of price, reflecting consistent volatility.
A low Calmar ratio and extreme drawdowns suggest the stock is high-risk, with potential for significant losses during downturns.
StockIQ conclusion
BRRR’s **moderate score of 57** is driven by a stark contrast between its **strong technical performance**—evidenced by positive momentum and overperformance relative to the index—and its **severe fundamental and growth weaknesses**, including negative profitability metrics and extreme volatility. While short-term traders may find appeal in the stock’s bullish technicals and overbought conditions, long-term investors face significant hurdles: negative ROE, collapsed earnings growth, and high-risk profiles. The stock’s valuation remains speculative, with a negative P/E and low NAV per share, while news sentiment offers no clear directional guidance. The risk of extreme drawdowns and the lack of fundamental recovery signals caution, making BRRR a high-risk, high-reward proposition dependent on near-term technical trends rather than sustainable growth.
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
49
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
38
Quality
No data available
Value
55
Momentum
62
Risk
42
Sentiment
44
Fundamental
42
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 **CoinShares Valkyrie Bitcoin Fund** indirectly highlights broader Bitcoin market trends rather than specific fund developments. Headlines focus on Bitcoin’s volatile price swings—recent gains (up 9% in late August) and declines (down 1.5% in early September)—alongside analyst optimism about a potential bull market driven by ETF inflows and macroeconomic signals. The shift in momentum trader interest away from crypto toward AI and semiconductors also suggests evolving investor sentiment. No direct fund-specific news was reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about CoinShares Valkyrie Bitcoin Fund. News trend score: 44. Reason: 1 of the last 5 articles are negative, versus 0 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
11
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
13
Fundamentals
42
Technical
62
Valuation
55
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+19%
Market Narrative
36
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for BRRR suggests traders are anchored near resistance (2.4% away), reinforcing a reluctance to push further despite momentum (+16.8% ROC) and elevated volume (1.16x avg). Overconfidence is also notable, as price gains outpace fundamental growth (-1.2% EPS), while mild euphoria (RSI 68, +6.7% above 200-day avg) hints at selective optimism. The dominant anchoring bias may stem from traders treating resistance as a psychological barrier rather than a dynamic target. The key question is whether the narrative gap (11-point disparity) will widen if fundamentals fail to justify current momentum.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 05:21 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Bitcoin was down 1.5% this week as of September 1"
"ETF inflows surge while BTC tests a $65,000 breakout"
📈 3D 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
Charles Mackay — 88/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 33/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s divergent scores reflect stark contrasts between methodologies rooted in technical momentum versus fundamental or cyclical analysis. Jesse Livermore’s high score (79) suggests a strong upward trend in price action, aligning with his focus on market psychology and breakout patterns. Meanwhile, Graham-based approaches (both Defensive and Enterprising) fail due to insufficient valuation or balance-sheet data, while Howard Marks’ mid-cycle assessment (66) hints at cautious optimism—though not yet overextended. On the opposite end, Samuel Nelson’s low score (11) flags potential overbought conditions, while Thorstein Veblen’s warning (33) implies speculative growth chasing. The divide between technical traders (Livermore) and cyclical/critical investors (Marks, Nelson) underscores whether the stock’s rise is structurally sound or merely a speculative bubble.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 88
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 69
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: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 67
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 66
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
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%
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 50
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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%
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 44
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 44
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 39
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 33
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 0
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: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 274 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (6 bullish · 4 bearish · 0 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.
Medium 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-9.8%
ROA
-9.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$2.20
Cash
—
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$22.35
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$22.35
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 0 positive, 4 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 5 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 20.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.8.2026
CoinShares Valkyrie Bitcoin Fund (BRRR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
BRRR currently scores 49/100 (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.
BRRR's technical score is 62/100, 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; RSI 54.7 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.37 (3y annualized return 19.7% / max drawdown 53.3%); Return on equity (ROE): -9.8% (negative); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -119.0%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BRRR.
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.
343,017 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 319,911 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.1% 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