Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$10.80
▼ $0.15 (-1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/26 08:11 AM
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$732.35M
Day Range
$10.71 - $11.16
52-Week Range
$10.70 - $34.59
Beta
—
Next Earnings
11.11.2026
Support
$10.70
Resistance
$16.48
CSIQ is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-18.8% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 0/13 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
No notable strengths identified.
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 6.8% of price
Risk
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
22
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
9
Risk
34
Sentiment
50
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 Canadian Solar Inc. has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings performance, highlighting a growing order backlog alongside declining profitability. Analysts from Wells Fargo and Mizuho downgraded the stock, lowering price targets to $17 while maintaining a neutral or equal-weight rating. The company’s focus on strategic U.S. expansion and broader energy sector volatility were also noted, though no major new developments beyond earnings and analyst reactions emerged.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Canadian Solar Inc. - Common. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 5 vs. 5 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
34
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
81
Fundamentals
—
Technical
9
Valuation
—
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.
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-30%
Market Narrative
33
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here suggests a cautious herd mentality, where participants appear to be avoiding CSIQ’s underperformance relative to peers (-2.3% vs. -3.9%). Elevated volume (1.37x) and a 3-month decline (-21.2%) indicate lingering loss aversion, but the absence of extreme volatility or sentiment extremes mitigates panic. The narrative gap (-20) hints at a disconnect between market reality (stronger fundamentals) and investor perception, possibly reinforcing herd behavior. The key question remains whether this relative outperformance will sustain or if the stock’s broader weakness will reassert itself.
Updated: 09/05/2026, 09:02 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Canadian Solar Q2 Loss Wider Than Estimates, Revenues Fall Y/Y"
"lowers the price target from $18 to $17"
"Strategic U.S. expansion highlighted in earnings call"
📈 4D 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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for CSIQ reflects a clash between cyclical optimism and cautionary skepticism. Investors like Charles Mackay and Howard Marks (both cycle-focused) see early-to-mid cycle strength, with Mackay even dismissing crowd mania and Marks noting favorable risk positioning. Meanwhile, Samuel Armstrong Nelson leans similarly bullish, while other cycle-aware thinkers like Livermore and Loeb flag red flags—Livermore’s low score suggests a downtrend, and Loeb’s warning highlights perceived capital risks. The middle ground is muddled: Graham, Fisher, and Lynch lack sufficient data to form concrete views, while Veblen’s ambiguity hints at unproven growth. The extreme contrast between Morgan Housel’s outright rejection (0 score) and the more measured optimism of Marks’ cycle analysis underscores whether CSIQ’s volatility is a temporary blip or a structural risk.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 100
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 70
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 67
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
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%
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%
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 26
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 21
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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)
🔴 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
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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 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.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 10 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Motley Fool · 31.8.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
Benzinga · 28.8.2026
Benzinga · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Moby · 28.8.2026
MT Newswires · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Investing.com · 27.8.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Canadian Solar Inc. - Common (CSIQ) — 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 CSIQ 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.
CSIQ's technical score is 9/100, 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: ATR: 6.8% of price; Calmar: -0.33 (3y annualized return -24.6% / max drawdown 74.4%); Price is below the 50-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CSIQ.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chang Leslie Li Hsien | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 1,949 | +1,949 | — |
| Zhu Xinbo | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 12,594 | +12,594 | — |
| Wong Andrew Luen Cheung | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 1,949 | +1,949 | — |
| Wong Pauline W. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 2,519 | +2,519 | — |
| Chen Yu (Kang) | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 9,446 | +9,446 | — |
| Qu Shawn Xiaohua | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 18,892 | +18,892 | — |
| Templeton Lauren C | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 1,949 | +1,949 | — |
| Parkin Colin | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 18,892 | +18,892 | — |
| Ruda Harry E | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 1,949 | +1,949 | — |
| Wong Pauline W. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 2,519 | +2,519 | — |
| Chang Leslie Li Hsien | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 24,108 | +1,949 | — |
| Zhu Xinbo | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 35,916 | +12,594 | — |
| Parkin Colin | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 47,434 | +18,892 | — |
| Chen Yu (Kang) | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 21,392 | +9,446 | — |
| Templeton Lauren C | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 24,108 | +1,949 | — |
| Qu Shawn Xiaohua | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 54,349 | +18,892 | — |
| Ruda Harry E | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 24,108 | +1,949 | — |
| Wong Andrew Luen Cheung | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.7.2026 | 24,108 | +1,949 | — |
| Chang Leslie Li Hsien | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.7.2026 | 4 | -4 | $15.69 |
| Ruda Harry E | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 809 | -809 | — |
| Chang Leslie Li Hsien | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 809 | +809 | — |
| Ruda Harry E | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.7.2026 | 493 | -493 | $15.69 |
| Wong Andrew Luen Cheung | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 809 | +809 | — |
| Templeton Lauren C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 809 | -809 | — |
| Templeton Lauren C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.7.2026 | 809 | +809 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,334,783 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 17,700,892 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
64.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.4% 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