Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$4.12
▲ $0.04 (+1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/26 10:05 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/25/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$443.99M
Day Range
$3.82 - $4.19
52-Week Range
$0.33 - $4.19
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
Support
$0.58
Resistance
$4.19
CYPH is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+1090.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/25 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
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: 103.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Death Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200
Technical
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (66/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (45/100) — 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
62
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
42
Value
45
Momentum
75
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
50
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 Cypherpunk Technologies Inc. highlights its significant stock price movements and strategic shifts tied to cryptocurrency. The company saw a 30.4% intraday gain in late August, reaching $2.19 per share, driven by its growing exposure to Zcash (ZEC)—including a substantial treasury stake and acquisition of a major mining operation. Analysts, like Cantor Fitzgerald, maintained an Overweight rating with a $1.6 price target, citing its asset-backed valuation. While broader healthcare sector activity was noted, Cypherpunk’s surge stood out as a key focus.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Cypherpunk Technologies Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
84
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
48
Investors appear highly excited (84), but evidence of strong fundamental conviction is comparatively weak (48).
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
50
Technical
75
Valuation
45
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+566%
Market Narrative
88
Fundamental Reality
48
Narrative Gap
+40
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for CYPH is dominated by euphoric overconfidence, where price momentum far outpaces fundamentals and traders appear anchored near resistance. The extreme RSI and sentiment scores suggest traders are ignoring overbought conditions, while the narrative gap (88 vs. 48) hints at detached optimism. The key question is whether traders will sustain this disconnect or pivot when momentum stalls. The narrow distance to resistance may act as a psychological trigger for profit-taking.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:51 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Cantor Fitzgerald reiterates Cypherpunk Technologies (NASDAQ:CYPH) with an Overweight rating and maintains a $1.6 price target."
"Cypherpunk Technologies (NASDAQ:CYPH) shares rose 30.4% to $2.19 during Thursday’s regular session."
"The trading volume of these stocks is deviating from the norm in today's session."
"Cypherpunk Technologies Inc. now holds a significant ZEC treasury and has acquired a major Zcash mining operation, boosting its asset value."
📈 10D Investor Psychology
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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some investors seeing opportunity while others flag severe risks. Walter Bagehot and Peter Lynch both rate it highly—Bagehot’s near-perfect score suggests strong liquidity and resilience in a downturn, while Lynch and Jesse Livermore both spot growth potential, with Livermore’s trend-based approach aligning with the stock’s price action. Meanwhile, Benjamin Graham’s more conservative frameworks (both standard and enterprising investor) remain lukewarm, signaling a lack of clear margin-of-safety or deep undervaluation. On the opposite end, the lowest scores—from Mackay, Nelson, and Housel—highlight speculative or overbought traits, with Mackay’s verdict implying a crowd-driven frenzy and Housel’s warning about volatility-induced panic selling. The contrast between the bullish growth camp (Lynch, Livermore) and the bearish caution (Mackay, Marks) underscores whether this stock is a high-conviction bet or a speculative gamble.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 87
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 84
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 33
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 25
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 25
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 21
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 18
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 18
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 2
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 1
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 an uptrend (10 bullish · 4 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 uptrend 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
3.1%
ROA
3.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.07
Cash
$14.04M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
35.56
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
$2.17
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.17
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 7 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Stocktwits · 25.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 7.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
ChartMill · 28.8.2026
Benzinga · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 27.8.2026
ChartMill · 25.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 25.8.2026
ChartMill · 24.8.2026
ChartMill · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Cypherpunk Technologies Inc. (CYPH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 62/100, 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.
CYPH currently scores 62/100 (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.
CYPH's technical score is 75/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: 103.9%; Net income growth: 107.1%; Current ratio: 35.56.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 10.6% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CYPH.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dietz Thomas John | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 20,000 | -20,000 | $1.72 |
| Dietz Thomas John | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 132,500 | -20,000 | $1.72 |
| Zhang Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 2,000,000 | -2,000,000 | — |
| Zhang Kevin | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.8.2026 | 2,000,000 | -2,000,000 | — |
| Winklevoss Capital Fund, LLC | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 17.8.2026 | 16,570,852 | +16,570,852 | $0.00 |
| Winklevoss Capital Fund, LLC | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 17.8.2026 | 16,570,852 | -16,570,852 | $0.52 |
| Winklevoss Capital Fund, LLC | Other Transaction | 17.8.2026 | 43,290,042 | +43,290,042 | $0.77 |
| McEvoy William Patrick III | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 17.8.2026 | 16,570,852 | -16,570,852 | $0.52 |
| McEvoy William Patrick III | Other Transaction | 17.8.2026 | 43,290,042 | +43,290,042 | $0.77 |
| McEvoy William Patrick III | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 17.8.2026 | 16,570,852 | +16,570,852 | $0.00 |
| Richard Christian M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| Dietz Thomas John | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| Martin Patricia A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| ONSI DOUGLAS E | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,000,000 | -1,000,000 | — |
| Mashiach Nissim | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| Oei Khing Djien | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| LI WILLIAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| McEvoy William Patrick III | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,000,000 | -1,000,000 | — |
| ONSI DOUGLAS E | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,000,000 | -1,000,000 | — |
| LI WILLIAM | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| Mashiach Nissim | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| McEvoy William Patrick III | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 1,000,000 | -1,000,000 | — |
| Martin Patricia A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | — |
| Dietz Thomas John | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| Oei Khing Djien | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
9,853,398 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 6,866,341 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 44.1% 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