Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$14.69
▼ $0.10 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/21 07:29 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/21/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
$2.62B
Day Range
$14.59 - $14.93
52-Week Range
$8.39 - $20.28
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$14.59
Resistance
$20.28
CALY is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+54.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/31 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $18.74 vs. price $14.69 (+27.6%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Net margin
Net margin: -19.9% (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
42
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
54
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
6
Risk
42
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
36
Institutional
0
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 Callaway Golf Company has centered on positive analyst sentiment and financial optimism, with Truist Securities raising its price target to $20 and maintaining a "Buy" rating. The company’s Q2 revenue growth (+13.8%) and raised 2026 guidance were highlighted as strong indicators of market demand. However, controversy arose after Callaway abruptly ended a co-branding deal with Good Good Golf following a viral ad sparking backlash, leading to a $1 million donation to anti-violence organizations. Analysts also noted Callaway’s low valuation and net cash position as key strengths.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Callaway Golf Company. News trend score: 80. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
86
Fundamentals
36
Technical
6
Valuation
62
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
-3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests **herding** dominates as CALY’s +1.1% gain aligns tightly with peers (+1.3%), implying traders are following broader sector momentum rather than fundamentals. The **anchoring effect** (3.1% above support) may reinforce this, as traders avoid selling below a psychological level. Meanwhile, **confirmation bias** (narrative-reality gap of +6) hints at selective attention to positive narratives despite stagnant fundamentals. The key open question: *Will herding sustain if peers diverge, or will anchoring break under further negative momentum?*
Updated: 09/05/2026, 04:13 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Truist Securities maintains Callaway Golf (NYSE:CALY) with a Buy and raises the price target from $19 to $20."
"Acushnet Holdings Corp. Q2 revenue is +13.8% as 2026 guidance rises on strong demand and innovation."
"Callaway Golf has dropped a business relationship... after a controversial ad that went viral and created fallout for the stock."
"Reed's direct holdings still expanded to 172,482 shares, now valued at $2.7 million."
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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 21/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s divergent verdicts reflect a sharp split between methodologies prioritizing technical or cyclical strength and those skeptical of its fundamentals or market positioning. Charles Mackay, Jack Schwager, and Samuel Armstrong Nelson—who focus on crowd psychology, disciplined setups, and cyclical positioning—all rate it favorably (scores 74–80), suggesting it may benefit from oversold conditions or structured entry points. In contrast, value-oriented investors like Benjamin Graham and Philip Fisher (scores 21–57) dismiss it as either overpriced or lacking the stability or growth quality they demand. The middle-ground approaches—Howard Marks’ mixed cycle assessment (63–64) and Peter Lynch’s caution (66)—highlight a stock that may have potential but risks overvaluation, while efficiency skeptics like Malkiel/Bogle and volatility-averse thinkers like Housel (scores 25–47) outright reject it as either unexploitable or too risky for patient investors.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 93
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 84
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)
🟢 72
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
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 65
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 62
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
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
🟡 50
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 43
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 41
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 37
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 37
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 27
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 21
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 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 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
42.1%
Operating Margin
6.2%
Net Margin
-19.9%
EBITDA Margin
8.5%
ROE
-19.8%
ROA
-5.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$2.23
Cash
$903.20M
Total Debt
$1.42B
Current Ratio
1.36
Debt/Equity
0.68
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$14.69
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$18.74
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+27.6%
🟢 Appears cheap 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% | $287.09M | $263.39M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $278.12M | $234.09M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $274.64M | $212.07M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $276.36M | $195.78M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $283.27M | $184.10M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$302.20M
Terminal Value
$4.47B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.90B
Enterprise Value
$3.99B
Net Debt
$512.80M
Equity Value
$3.48B
*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
$11.14
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$6.61
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 7 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Motley Fool · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.8.2026
Fintel · 29.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Barrons.com · 28.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Barrons.com · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Moneywise · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
StockStory · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 20.8.2026
Motley Fool · 20.8.2026
Callaway Golf Company (CALY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
CALY currently scores 42/100 (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, CALY's estimated fair value is $18.74, which is 27.6% above the current price of $14.69. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CALY's technical score is 6/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $18.74 vs. price $14.69 (+27.6%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 69.6%; Net income growth: 71.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Net margin: -19.9% (negative); Calmar: -0.03 (3y annualized return -2.3% / max drawdown 66.5%); Return on equity (ROE): -19.8% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CALY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 13 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.8.2026 | 87,665 | -3,506 | $15.74 |
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 0 | -6,494 | — |
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 91,171 | +6,494 | — |
| Reed Timothy R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 179,493 | +12,988 | — |
| Reed Timothy R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.8.2026 | 172,482 | -7,011 | $15.74 |
| Reed Timothy R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 0 | -12,988 | — |
| Reed Timothy R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.8.2026 | 7,011 | -7,011 | $15.74 |
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 6,494 | -6,494 | — |
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 6,494 | +6,494 | — |
| Thomas Jennifer L. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 26.8.2026 | 3,506 | -3,506 | $15.74 |
| Reed Timothy R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 12,988 | +12,988 | — |
| Reed Timothy R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 12,988 | -12,988 | — |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 294 | -294 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 293 | -293 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 293 | -293 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 520 | -520 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 452,830 | -520 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 200,984 | -293 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 200,983 | -293 | $18.00 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 25,070 | -25,070 | $18.30 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 14,135 | -14,135 | $18.30 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 14,135 | -14,135 | $18.30 |
| BREWER OLIVER G III | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 14,134 | -14,134 | $18.30 |
| Hickey Glenn F. | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 28,843 | -28,843 | $18.74 |
| Hickey Glenn F. | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 72,239 | -28,843 | $18.74 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,234,282 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,401,844 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 63.9% 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