Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$12.15
▼ $0.16 (-1.3%)
Market data updated: 09/24 09:09 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/24/2026
News analyzed: 09/24/2026
Market Cap
$2.86B
Day Range
$11.80 - $12.74
52-Week Range
$6.92 - $27.80
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$8.44
Resistance
$13.66
-26.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/30 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
🟢 Bullish
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
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$67.85 vs. price $12.15 (-658.5%)
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
48
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
26
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
66
Risk
26
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
45
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 Bitdeer Technologies Group has focused on its strategic expansion into AI and high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure. Notably, the company secured a $100 million land deal in Rockdale for a potential AI/HPC site, though concerns remain about power access, water rights, and commercialization plans. Analysts like KBW rated the move as "Market Perform," reflecting cautious optimism amid broader industry shifts toward AI-driven data centers. No direct operational or financial details specific to Bitdeer’s mining operations were highlighted in these sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bitdeer Technologies Group. News trend score: 56. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
9
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
58
Fundamentals
45
Technical
66
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-29%
Market Narrative
44
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant Overconfidence (73) reflects a disconnect between BTDR’s price momentum (+21.5% ROC) and stagnant EPS growth (-7.5%), where traders may overestimate upside potential. Confirmation Bias (20) and Anchoring (53) further reinforce this, as narrative optimism (65) outpaces fundamental reality (50). Loss Aversion (68) suggests lingering hesitation from prior declines, but muted volume (0.78x avg) contradicts panic. The key tension lies in whether fundamentals can sustain the momentum gap—or if traders will pivot when earnings or resistance tests reveal cracks.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 12:38 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"$100M landgrab for Rockdale AI/HPC site"
"Bitdeer moving one step closer to an AI deal"
"questions remain about which power and water rights came with the land"
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
Charles Mackay — 89/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for BTDR reflects deep philosophical and tactical differences among these methodologies. Charles Mackay’s high score suggests the stock lacks obvious crowd-driven mania, aligning with his focus on avoiding speculative bubbles, while the low scores from Graham and Housel—both emphasizing defensive value and patience—highlight concerns over volatility and valuation gaps. Meanwhile, Fisher and Schwager’s near-zero scores underscore a lack of quality growth or disciplined trading setups, contrasting with Marks’ mixed but cautiously optimistic view, which balances business fundamentals against elevated expectations. Livermore’s negative trend verdict clashes with the more neutral assessments from Malkiel/Bogle and Veblen, who see nuanced signals rather than clear buy or sell cases, illustrating how momentum-based and fundamental approaches often clash.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 89
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 76
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 53
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 51
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 46
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 42
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 27
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 23
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 20
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 10
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)
🔴 10
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 6
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 5
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (5 bullish · 2 bearish · 3 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.
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
9.8%
Operating Margin
25.8%
Net Margin
10.6%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
7.6%
ROA
2.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$4.36
Cash
$476.27M
Total Debt
$0
Current Ratio
0.91
Debt/Equity
1.27
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$12.15
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$67.85
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-658.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-704.61M | $-646.43M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-682.67M | $-574.59M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-674.20M | $-520.60M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-678.44M | $-480.62M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-695.40M | $-451.96M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-741.56M
Terminal Value
$-10.97B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-7.13B
Enterprise Value
$-9.80B
Net Debt
$-476.27M
Equity Value
$-9.33B
*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
$3.68
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.29
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 9 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
BeInCrypto · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Blockspace · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Bitdeer Technologies Group (BTDR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
BTDR currently scores 48/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, BTDR's estimated fair value is -$67.85, which is 658.5% below the current price of $12.15. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BTDR's technical score is 66/100, 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: Estimated fair value: -$67.85 vs. price $12.15 (-658.5%); ATR: 8.0% of price; Current ratio: 0.91.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BTDR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 3 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 14 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Potter Michael G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 115,942 | +115,942 | — |
| Basit Haris Fozan | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $8.84 |
| Potter Michael G | Open Market Purchase | 12.8.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $9.04 |
| Potter Michael G | Open Market Purchase | 12.8.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $9.04 |
| Potter Michael G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 48,900 | +48,900 | — |
| Sirimongkolkasem Naphat | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
| Trainor-Degirolamo Sheldon | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
| Yang Guang George | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
| Basit Haris Fozan | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 24,000 | +24,000 | — |
| Potter Michael G | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 48,900 | +48,900 | — |
| Basit Haris Fozan | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 24,000 | +24,000 | — |
| Trainor-Degirolamo Sheldon | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
| Sirimongkolkasem Naphat | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
| Yang Guang George | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
54,972,271 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 55,589,381 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
27.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 29.2% 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