Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$35.31
▼ $0.32 (-0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/18 04:59 PM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$35.22 - $35.50
52-Week Range
$23.52 - $36.60
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+42.5% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 5/12 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
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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.
FENY demonstrates a robust overall investor score of 89, driven primarily by its strong technical performance and favorable news sentiment. The technical category achieves a near-perfect score of 91, reflecting consistent bullish signals: the stock price remains firmly above both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, indicating sustained upward momentum. The MACD histogram’s positivity and an RSI of 63.5 further validate this momentum, though the %K value at 65.4 suggests a neutral range without overbought conditions. Meanwhile, the news category scores an exceptional 98, with a mix of industry-specific positives—such as geopolitical tailwinds (e.g., Hormuz escalations benefiting refiners) and strategic acquisitions (e.g., SLB’s Kelvion deal)—outweighing a single negative narrative about debt spirals. However, the risk category’s score of 58 highlights volatility concerns, with a relatively low ATR of 1.8% (suggesting limited short-term volatility) but a Calmar ratio of 0.55, indicating a historically high drawdown (22.6%) relative to its 3-year annualized return of 12.3%. This discrepancy underscores a trade-off between long-term gains and periodic volatility risk.
The stock exhibits clear bullish momentum, with prices above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a positive MACD histogram, and an RSI of 63.5—all signaling healthy upward traction. The %K value remains neutral, avoiding overbought conditions.
Strong technical indicators typically precede sustained price appreciation, making this a critical driver of investor confidence.
Recent news overwhelmingly favors FENY, with multiple positive reports on geopolitical opportunities, strategic mergers, and sectoral growth estimates, outweighing a single negative macroeconomic concern.
Positive news sentiment can attract institutional and retail capital, reinforcing upward price pressure.
While the ATR (1.8%) suggests low short-term volatility, the Calmar ratio (0.55) reveals a historically high drawdown (22.6%) relative to its 12.3% annualized return, indicating potential for significant short-term losses despite long-term gains.
High drawdowns can erode investor confidence and trigger liquidation during market stress, even if long-term returns are strong.
StockIQ conclusion
FENY presents a compelling case for investors with a strong technical foundation and overwhelmingly positive news sentiment, supported by long-term growth potential. However, the risk category’s high drawdown risk and dependence on sector-specific tailwinds introduce meaningful caution. The stock’s strength lies in its momentum and external positives, but its vulnerability to macroeconomic shifts and volatility underscores the need for disciplined risk management. The overall score reflects a balanced profile: high upside potential tempered by inherent volatility and external dependencies.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
69
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
23d ago · $34.47
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
23d ago · $34.47
Evidence: 10 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
86
$34.47
Now
69
$35.31
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 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
61
Risk
50
Sentiment
100
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 on the **Fidelity MSCI Energy Index ETF**—as reflected in broader energy and market trends—has centered on shifting dynamics in the energy sector, including misinterpretations of refinery data, geopolitical tensions (like Middle East escalations benefiting refiners), and rising bond yields impacting long-term investments. Notably, energy infrastructure expansions (e.g., SLB’s $3.4B Kelvion deal) and AI-driven demand for data centers are highlighted as growth drivers, alongside volatility in Treasury yields and energy sector performance. While no direct ETF-specific news exists, these themes suggest underlying sector momentum.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Fidelity MSCI Energy Index ETF. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
34
Fundamentals
—
Technical
61
Valuation
—
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+19%
Market Narrative
67
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 for FENY suggests a dominant anchoring bias, with traders fixated on resistance at 2.2% away. FOMO and euphoria coexist but are secondary, fueled by momentum and extreme sentiment. The narrative gap (14) hints at a disconnect between optimism and fundamentals. The key question: will traders break resistance or adjust anchors if momentum stalls?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 11:51 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Energy sector outlook: AI data centers may boost midstream volumes."
"Phillips 66 and DHT Holdings benefit from Middle East tensions, strong crack spreads & tanker rates through 2026."
📈 14D 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
Morgan Housel — 65/100
🔴 Weakest match
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 37/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for FENY reflects a clash between methodologies that prioritize patient, qualitative growth and those wary of speculative or cyclical risks. Morgan Housel’s high score and positive verdict highlight his focus on quiet compounders and long-term patience, suggesting the stock aligns with his principles of steady, durable returns. In contrast, the lowest scores—from Nelson, Marks (cycle), and Livermore—flag concerns about overvaluation, market timing, or lack of clear trends, reflecting their caution toward speculative or late-cycle opportunities. Meanwhile, the near-unanimous ‘not enough data’ verdicts from Graham, Fisher, Lynch, and others underscore a fundamental data gap, leaving these frameworks unable to form a definitive opinion. This tension between growth optimism and cyclical skepticism creates a polarized debate: is FENY a patient investor’s quiet winner or a speculative bubble waiting to burst?
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 65
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 58
Moderate risk 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)
🟡 53
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 53
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 51
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 50
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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%
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 40
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 39
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
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
Based on the last 275 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (5 bullish · 3 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 uptrend 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 18.6.2026 | $0.210 |
| 20.3.2026 | $0.187 |
| 19.12.2025 | $0.185 |
| 19.9.2025 | $0.195 |
| 20.6.2025 | $0.218 |
| 21.3.2025 | $0.189 |
| 20.12.2024 | $0.162 |
| 20.9.2024 | $0.207 |
| 21.6.2024 | $0.184 |
| 15.3.2024 | $0.174 |
| 15.12.2023 | $0.200 |
| 15.9.2023 | $0.172 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 6 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 23.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 21.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 21.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.7.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Fidelity MSCI Energy Index ETF (FENY) — 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 FENY 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.
FENY's technical score is 61/100, 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; RSI 53.9 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend; CMF 20 days: -0.06.
Yes — FENY has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
134,760 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 335,776 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 40.0% 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