Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Miscellaneous · ·
$24.62
▲ $0.21 (+0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/24 09:36 PM
News analyzed: 09/24/2026
Market Cap
$7.88B
Day Range
$24.26 - $24.75
52-Week Range
$22.76 - $34.24
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$23.26
Resistance
$28.89
-13.9% (1Y)
🔴 Weak
Strengths: 5/13 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
MACD
MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.05 (3y annualized return 1.5% / max drawdown 32.0%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
63
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
52
Risk
42
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
No data available
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 CAE Inc. has centered on its strong financial performance and strategic growth, particularly in aerospace and defense sectors. Analysts highlighted robust first-quarter earnings, solid cash flow, and expanding defense contracts, alongside a debt-free balance sheet. The company also completed a key expansion with United Airlines and saw an analyst upgrade with a raised price target. Board updates and investor optimism further underscored its long-term potential.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about CAE Inc - Common. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 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
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
19
Fundamentals
—
Technical
52
Valuation
—
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-3%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant herding behavior suggests traders are passively mirroring peers’ underperformance, with CAE’s slight outperformance relative to its sector reinforcing conformity. The elevated volume and positive sentiment (92/100) create tension, as FOMO and panic selling scores remain elevated, indicating speculative activity amid cautious sentiment. The key question is whether the narrative gap (narrativeScore 54 vs. realityScore 50) will widen, pulling traders toward euphoria or anchoring. The absence of extreme volatility (ATR 1.01x) suggests no panic-driven liquidation, but the negative momentum (-6.0% ROC) may test support levels soon.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 02:54 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"CAE Q1 Earnings Call Highlights — 'Strong Cash Flow and Defense Growth Offset by...'"
"RBC Capital upgrades CAE to Outperform, raises price target to $46"
"United Airlines, CAE Complete First Phase of Denver Flight Training Center Expansion"
"CAE announces the final 2026 Meeting Board of Directors election results and welcomes Bruce Ross to its Board of Directors"
📈 6D 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 — 72/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 23/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock divides methodologies sharply, with a few bullish signals clashing against a chorus of caution. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Jack Schwager both see strong technical setups—Nelson flags an oversold cycle position, while Schwager highlights a disciplined reward/risk trade—but these contrast sharply with Jesse Livermore’s outright negative trend verdict, which would reject the stock outright. Meanwhile, the valuation and fundamental purists (Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Bagehot, and Smith) all default to neutral due to insufficient data, leaving their verdicts unresolved. Howard Marks’ mixed but guarded stance—acknowledging a solid business but questioning inflated expectations—mirrors Gerald Loeb’s moderate risk warning, while Morgan Housel’s volatility critique and the efficient-market skeptics (Malkiel/Bogle) further dampen enthusiasm. Even Charles Mackay’s crowd-mania check passes, but the overall split suggests this stock’s appeal hinges entirely on technical or cyclical timing rather than broad consensus.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 72
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)
🟡 50
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: 0%
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%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
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%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
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: 0%
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 49
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 48
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)
🟡 45
Moderate risk 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)
🟡 42
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 28
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 23
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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
Based on the last 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (5 bullish · 4 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 uptrend 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.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Zacks · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
CNW Group · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
CNW Group · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Zacks · 3.9.2026
MT Newswires · 20.8.2026
Benzinga · 17.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 17.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 14.8.2026
MarketBeat · 13.8.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for CAE Inc - Common (CAE) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for CAE specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
CAE's technical score is 52/100, 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: MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; RSI 50.5 — healthy positive momentum; Price is above the SAR point — uptrend.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.05 (3y annualized return 1.5% / max drawdown 32.0%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CAE.
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.
5,990,672 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 6,110,930 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
66.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 51.7% 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