Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$2.50
▼ $0.08 (-3.3%)
Market data updated: 09/26 08:52 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$291.59M
Day Range
$2.46 - $2.54
52-Week Range
$2.39 - $52.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
Support
$2.39
Resistance
$9.45
CXAI is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-93.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/25 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Net income growth
Net income growth: 30.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -383.5% (negative)
Fundamental
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
41
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
46
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
16
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
30
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 CXApp Inc. (CXAI) has focused on its strategic progress and market positioning. The company regained compliance with Nasdaq’s minimum bid price requirement in early September, signaling financial stability. Earlier, it secured a $2.5M+ multi-year deal with a Fortune 100 financial services firm, reinforcing its CXAI 2.0 growth strategy and expanding its enterprise AI footprint. Additionally, CXAI’s Q2 2026 earnings call was noted, though specifics were limited to the provided transcript reference. Overall, the narrative highlights compliance recovery and competitive wins.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about CXApp Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 14 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
37
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
25
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
30
Technical
16
Valuation
50
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, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-73%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
25
Narrative Gap
+28
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s extreme loss aversion (100) dominates, reflecting a deep price drawdown (-72.4% over three months) where investors cling to positions despite muted trading activity. Confirmation bias (36) persists due to a +28 narrative gap, as fundamentals deteriorate (revenue -0.4%, margins shrinking) but sentiment remains unchecked. The absence of panic selling (31) or euphoria (19) suggests a cautious, risk-averse stance rather than extreme behavior. The key question: will the narrative gap close organically, or will a fundamental catalyst force a re-evaluation of the disconnect between perception and reality?
Updated: 09/06/2026, 06:03 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2), the minimum bid price requirement"
"another proof point for the CXAI 2.0 strategy"
"$2.5M+ Multi-Year Agreement with Fortune 100 Global Financial Services Company"
"top gainers and losers one hour before the close of the markets"
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 — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in methodology verdicts for CXAI reflects deep contrasts in how these investors prioritize signals. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Benjamin Graham’s Enterprising approach both lean cautiously positive, with Nelson’s cycle-based model seeing it as oversold and Graham’s valuation framework lacking concrete data—but not outright rejecting it. In contrast, Fisher, Livermore, and Housel dismiss it outright, with Fisher rejecting its growth quality, Livermore flagging a negative trend, and Housel warning of volatility that would deter patient investors. Meanwhile, Marks’ mixed verdict and Malkiel/Bogle’s skepticism highlight a tension between recognizing potential (early-to-mid cycle) and the lack of clear edge over passive strategies. Even Bagehot’s liquidity concerns and Veblen’s profit ambiguity underscore how this stock’s murky fundamentals and speculative undertones split traditional value hunters from those wary of overvaluation or instability.
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 96
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 82
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: 15%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 80
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 76
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 58
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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)
🟡 38
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 31
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 15
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 10 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.
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.
Gross Margin
87.4%
Operating Margin
-383.5%
Net Margin
-294.0%
EBITDA Margin
-382.5%
ROE
-96.4%
ROA
-41.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$11.10M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.23
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 14 positive, 3 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 20.8.2026
Yahoo · 20.8.2026
Benzinga · 20.8.2026
Benzinga · 19.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.8.2026
ChartMill · 14.8.2026
ChartMill · 14.8.2026
ChartMill · 14.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
Benzinga · 14.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 13.8.2026
Yahoo · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
CXApp Inc. (CXAI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, 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.
CXAI currently scores 41/100 (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.
CXAI's technical score is 16/100, 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: Net income growth: 30.6%; Current ratio: 2.23; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -383.5% (negative); Net margin: -294.0% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CXAI.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MARTINO CAMILLO | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 934,580 | +934,580 | — |
| Mathai George | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 397,197 | +397,197 | — |
| EISNOR DI-ANN | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 397,197 | +397,197 | — |
| MARTINO CAMILLO | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | $0.25 |
| Priya Shanti | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 514,019 | +514,019 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 794,393 | +794,393 | — |
| MARTINO CAMILLO | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 401,010 | +200,000 | $0.25 |
| MARTINO CAMILLO | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 1,335,590 | +934,580 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 3,510,828 | +794,393 | — |
| Mathai George | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 691,984 | +397,197 | — |
| Priya Shanti | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 808,806 | +514,019 | — |
| EISNOR DI-ANN | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 691,984 | +397,197 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 675,000 | +675,000 | — |
| Mbanugo Joy | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 62,500 | +62,500 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 225,000 | +225,000 | — |
| Mbanugo Joy | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 187,500 | +187,500 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 675,000 | +675,000 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 225,000 | +225,000 | — |
| Mbanugo Joy | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 187,500 | +187,500 | — |
| Mbanugo Joy | Grant/Award from Employer | 13.4.2026 | 62,500 | +62,500 | — |
| EISNOR DI-ANN | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.5.2025 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.5.2025 | 250,000 | +250,000 | — |
| Mathai George | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.5.2025 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| MARTINO CAMILLO | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.5.2025 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Sheikh Khurram P | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.5.2025 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
242,776 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 245,712 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
51.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.8% 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