Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$7.94
▲ $0.11 (+1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/27 10:07 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/27/2026
Market Cap
$428.17M
Day Range
$7.47 - $8.00
52-Week Range
$5.25 - $10.42
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
Support
$6.22
Resistance
$8.00
DMAC 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.
+16.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/24 factors positiveRisk: Medium
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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 11.81
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$11.56 vs. price $7.94 (-245.5%)
Fair Value
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
58
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $7.94
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 14 to 74 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
32
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
85
Risk
48
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
46
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 DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. has centered on its strong investor interest and positive market sentiment. Analysts have raised price targets, with some predicting a 130% stock surge, while the company’s Q2 2026 earnings call highlighted promising progress in its preeclampsia treatment pipeline. The firm also announced participation in upcoming investor conferences, reinforcing its focus on clinical-stage biopharmaceuticals for preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, and acute ischemic stroke.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 7 of the last 16 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
65
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
85
Fundamentals
46
Technical
85
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+21%
Market Narrative
82
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+32
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
DMAC’s psychology is fragmented, with Euphoria (17) and FOMO (19) competing for dominance despite weak momentum. The narrative gap (8) suggests traders may be overestimating positive catalysts while ignoring flat technicals. The stock’s outperformance today relative to peers hints at selective positioning rather than broad herd behavior. The key question: Is the positive sentiment (86/100) masking underlying weakness, or will momentum finally break higher?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 03:33 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"potential upside of 130% in DiaMedica Therapeutics (DMAC)"
"HC Wainwright & Co. reiterates DiaMedica Therapeutics (DMAC) with a Buy and maintains $12 price target"
"reported quarterly losses of $(0.19) per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate of $(0.20) by 5 percent"
"Q2 2026 Earnings Call Highlights: Promising Preeclampsia..."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
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’s starkly divergent evaluations reflect a clash between risk tolerance, market psychology, and fundamental rigor. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights a perceived financial resilience—likely tied to strong liquidity or balance sheet strength—while the majority of methodologies, from Graham’s defensive criteria to Fisher’s lack of fundamental data, flag concerns about valuation, growth potential, or speculative bubbles. Mackay’s moderate excitement score suggests crowd-driven momentum, but Livermore’s indecision and Marks’ mid-cycle assessment imply a lack of clear directional conviction. Meanwhile, the near-unanimous rejection by Lynch, Housel, and Fisher—due to insufficient growth or volatility—contrasts sharply with Bagehot’s institutional stability lens, revealing how different frameworks prioritize either defensive fundamentals, speculative timing, or systemic risk.
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)
🟢 77
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 45
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 43
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 42
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 36
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 33
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 32
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 32
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
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 0
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: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 0
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?
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 an uptrend (10 bullish · 2 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
-58.4%
ROA
-53.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.70
Cash
$15.65M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
11.81
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$7.94
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$11.56
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-245.5%
🔴 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% | $-32.01M | $-29.37M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-34.61M | $-29.13M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-36.78M | $-28.40M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-38.39M | $-27.19M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-39.35M | $-25.57M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-29.10M
Terminal Value
$-620.44M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-403.24M
Enterprise Value
$-542.91M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-542.91M
*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
$1.19
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.19
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 8 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 16 articles.
Business Wire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
Zacks · 26.8.2026
Motley Fool · 18.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 11.8.2026
Moby · 11.8.2026
MarketBeat · 11.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
Business Wire · 10.8.2026
Benzinga · 10.8.2026
Business Wire · 4.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 3.8.2026
Business Wire · 17.7.2026
DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. (DMAC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 58/100, rated "Moderate" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
DMAC currently scores 58/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). 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, DMAC's estimated fair value is -$11.56, which is 245.5% below the current price of $7.94. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
DMAC's technical score is 85/100, 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: Current ratio: 11.81; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$11.56 vs. price $7.94 (-245.5%); ATR: 4.8% of price; Return on equity (ROE): -58.4% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for DMAC.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pauls Dietrich John | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 60,200 | +60,200 | — |
| Pauls Dietrich John | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 128,791 | +60,200 | — |
| Lewis Tanya | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| O'Connor Daniel J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Semba Charles Pauling | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Pauls Dietrich John | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 380,000 | +380,000 | — |
| Kellen Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 162,000 | +162,000 | — |
| Kuntz Richard | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Parsons James T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 51,189 | +51,189 | — |
| Giuffre Randall Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Krop Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 67,500 | +67,500 | — |
| Kuntz Richard | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| O'Connor Daniel J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Lewis Tanya | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Kellen Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 162,000 | +162,000 | — |
| Krop Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 67,500 | +67,500 | — |
| Giuffre Randall Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Parsons James T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 51,189 | +51,189 | — |
| Pauls Dietrich John | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 380,000 | +380,000 | — |
| Semba Charles Pauling | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.6.2026 | 40,412 | +40,412 | — |
| Parsons James T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 10,095 | +10,095 | $8.42 |
| Semba Charles Pauling | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 3,355 | +3,355 | $8.42 |
| Giuffre Randall Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 6,175 | +6,175 | $8.42 |
| Giuffre Randall Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 398,587 | +6,175 | $8.42 |
| Parsons James T. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 97,949 | +10,095 | $8.42 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,486,848 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 5,394,246 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 75.0% 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