Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Basic Materials · ·
$6.64
▲ $0.21 (+3.3%)
Market data updated: 09/14 04:47 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/14/2026
News analyzed: 09/14/2026
Market Cap
$696.94M
Day Range
$6.06 - $6.68
52-Week Range
$5.12 - $32.15
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
CRML is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
+6.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/22 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 99.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$2.91 vs. price $6.64 (-143.8%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (66/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
45
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
66
Quality
55
Value
38
Momentum
18
Risk
32
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
41
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 Critical Metals Corp. (CRML) has centered on its **proposed $835 million acquisition of European Lithium**, which has driven significant stock volatility, including a 19% spike in August. The deal faces a September court hearing, while broader industry trends—such as **China’s reported blockage of rare earth shipments to the U.S.** and **government-backed funding for U.S. mineral firms**—have also influenced investor attention. Analysts debate whether insider activity or geopolitical tensions are fueling rare earth stock movements.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Critical Metals Corp.. News trend score: 92. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
92
Fundamentals
41
Technical
18
Valuation
38
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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.
Price (3M)
-31%
Market Narrative
49
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
-3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant **Loss Aversion** (69) reflects lingering pain from a 20.3% drop over three months, despite recent momentum (+25.9% ROC). Overconfidence (62) emerges as traders overweight price gains over fundamentals, while FOMO (44) and euphoria (40) remain muted by the stock’s underperformance relative to peers. The **narrative gap** (28) suggests traders may be overestimating positive catalysts. The key question: Will traders hold gains amid unresolved fundamental concerns, or will loss aversion trigger defensive positioning?
Updated: 09/08/2026, 07:58 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"CRML Stock Eyes Second Weekly Gain: European Lithium Sets September Court Date For $835M Merger Deal"
"China reportedly blocks some rare earth shipments to US"
"Resource sector catches a bid as government-backed funding announced"
"Critical Metals spikes 19% as European Lithium merger drives move"
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
Peter Lynch — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for CRML reflects deep methodological contrasts: Peter Lynch’s near-perfect score highlights his focus on *growth potential* and undervaluation, where he sees the stock’s price lagging behind its future earnings trajectory. Meanwhile, the lowest scores—from Graham’s Enterprising Investor framework and Thorstein Veblen’s critique—signal concerns about *valuation extremes* and *speculative momentum*, respectively, where the stock either lacks margin-of-safety or appears driven by hype rather than fundamentals. Howard Marks’ split verdict (cycle positioning vs. high expectations) and Charles Mackay’s crowd-excitement warning bridge these extremes, suggesting the stock may appeal to growth hunters but risks overvaluation or market euphoria. In contrast, Livermore’s negative trend signal and Loeb’s risk flagging underscore a *contrarian caution*, while Fisher’s mid-tier score reflects insufficient data for his rigorous qualitative analysis. The debate thus hinges on whether CRML is a *growth bet* (Lynch) or a *high-risk speculative play* (Graham, Veblen), with most methodologies clustering around *moderate skepticism* due to mixed signals.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 100
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 83
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
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)
🟢 75
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
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%
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 41
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
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)
🔴 31
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 30
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 29
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 13
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 7
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 278 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 8 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 downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-56.4%
ROA
-30.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.56
Cash
$7.30M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.13
Debt/Equity
0.00
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$6.64
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$2.91
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-143.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-15.95M | $-14.63M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-17.25M | $-14.51M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-18.32M | $-14.15M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-19.12M | $-13.55M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-19.60M | $-12.74M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-14.50M
Terminal Value
$-309.12M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-200.91M
Enterprise Value
$-270.49M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-270.49M
*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
$0.88
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 7 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Stocktwits · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 28.8.2026
Stocktwits · 28.8.2026
Stocktwits · 25.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 25.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 25.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 24.8.2026
Motley Fool · 21.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 21.8.2026
Critical Metals Corp. (CRML) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 45/100, 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.
CRML currently scores 45/100 (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, CRML's estimated fair value is -$2.91, which is 143.8% below the current price of $6.64. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CRML's technical score is 18/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 99.9%; Net income growth: 62.8%; Debt/equity: 0.00.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$2.91 vs. price $6.64 (-143.8%); ATR: 8.8% of price; Current ratio: 0.13.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CRML.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 4 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhernov Mykhailo | Open Market Sale | 24.3.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | $8.04 |
| Zhernov Mykhailo | Open Market Sale | 24.3.2026 | 309,179 | -25,000 | $8.04 |
| Zhernov Mykhailo | Open Market Sale | 23.3.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | $8.07 |
| Zhernov Mykhailo | Open Market Sale | 23.3.2026 | 334,179 | -25,000 | $8.07 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
23,559,667 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 21,220,990 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 57.6% 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