Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$4.96
▼ $0.52 (-9.5%)
Market data updated: 09/24 10:18 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/24/2026
News analyzed: 09/24/2026
Market Cap
$91.99M
Day Range
$4.93 - $5.41
52-Week Range
$4.93 - $12.33
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
$4.93
Resistance
$12.32
CEPL is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-58.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/28 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 23.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$4.34 vs. price $4.96 (-187.6%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Not enough price history for this symbol to compute a current state.
Historical matches considered: 0
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
44
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
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
63
Value
38
Momentum
29
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
38
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.
Everyone's writing about Capstone Energy Plus, Inc.. News trend score: 74. Reason: 5 of the last 14 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
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
43
Psychology
90
Fundamentals
38
Technical
29
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-58%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
43
Narrative Gap
-1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
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 — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 31/100
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 97
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)
🟢 83
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)
🟢 79
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 74
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 73
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 55
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)
🟡 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 48
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
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)
🟡 36
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 34
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 16
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 55 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 8 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.
Not enough trading history for a Wyckoff-style market-structure analysis.
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
32.0%
Operating Margin
3.2%
Net Margin
2.7%
EBITDA Margin
7.2%
ROE
-6.4%
ROA
2.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.21
Cash
$28.18M
Total Debt
$50.64M
Current Ratio
0.96
Debt/Equity
-1.14
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.96
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$4.34
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-187.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
13.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.7% | $-3.83M | $-3.51M |
| 2 | 10.9% | $-4.24M | $-3.57M |
| 3 | 8.1% | $-4.59M | $-3.54M |
| 4 | 5.3% | $-4.83M | $-3.42M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-4.95M | $-3.22M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-3.36M
Terminal Value
$-78.08M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-50.74M
Enterprise Value
$-68.01M
Net Debt
$22.46M
Equity Value
$-90.47M
*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
-$2.13
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$2.40
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 14 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 18.8.2026
MarketBeat · 12.8.2026
Business Wire · 12.8.2026
Business Wire · 30.7.2026
Business Wire · 27.7.2026
Zacks · 23.7.2026
Business Wire · 22.7.2026
Capstone Energy Plus, Inc. (CEPL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 44/100, 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.
CEPL currently scores 44/100 (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, CEPL's estimated fair value is -$4.34, which is 187.6% below the current price of $4.96. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CEPL's technical score is 29/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 23.9%; Net income growth: 139.3%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$4.34 vs. price $4.96 (-187.6%); ATR: 13.1% of price; Current ratio: 0.96.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CEPL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 8 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canino Vincent J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.9.2026 | 544,452 | +2,990 | $5.77 |
| Fu Ping | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 52,536 | +5,357 | — |
| Close Christopher J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 24,238 | +5,357 | — |
| Beard Robert F. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 22,006 | +5,357 | — |
| Miller John P. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 57,164 | +5,357 | — |
| Powelson Robert F | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 86,224 | +5,357 | — |
| Wilson Denise | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 71,092 | +5,357 | — |
| Powelson Robert F | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 60,795 | +0 | — |
| Fu Ping | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 60,795 | +0 | — |
| Wilson Denise | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 60,795 | +0 | — |
| Canino Vincent J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2026 | 65,000 | +65,000 | — |
| Graves Candice | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.4.2026 | 19,500 | +19,500 | — |
| Canino Vincent J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 7.4.2026 | 5,874 | -5,874 | $5.93 |
| Canino Vincent J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 18.3.2026 | 54,265 | -54,265 | $6.29 |
| Miller John P. | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $2.00 |
| Canino Vincent J. | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 75,000 | +75,000 | $2.00 |
| Close Christopher J. | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $2.00 |
| Powelson Robert F | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $2.00 |
| Beard Robert F. | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $2.00 |
| Graves Candice | Open Market Purchase | 25.11.2025 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $2.00 |
| Canino Vincent J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.9.2025 | 2,982 | -2,982 | $2.68 |
| Juric John J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.9.2025 | 3,653 | -3,653 | $2.68 |
| Graves Candice | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.9.2025 | 80,000 | +80,000 | — |
| Fu Ping | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2025 | 4,149 | +4,149 | — |
| Powelson Robert F | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.8.2025 | 4,149 | +4,149 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
870,989 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 745,190 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 54.3% 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