Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$4.60
▲ $0.52 (+12.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 03:12 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$81.26M
Day Range
$3.90 - $4.79
52-Week Range
⚠️ Data anomaly
Beta
—
Next Earnings
19.11.2026
Support
$3.90
Resistance
$169.70
FGL is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-100.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 1/24 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
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
MACD
MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$1.71 vs. price $4.60 (-137.2%)
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
37
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
50
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
16
Risk
28
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
19
Institutional
56
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 **Founder Group Limited** has focused on its participation in Malaysia’s **Large-Scale Solar 6 (LSS6) program**, a RM13–15 billion ($3.2–3.7 billion) initiative to develop 2,500 MW of solar capacity with battery storage. The company, through its subsidiary **Founder Energy Sdn. Bhd.**, is bidding for contracts, positioning itself for long-term growth through 2029. While broader market movements (e.g., stock gains/losses) were noted, the solar energy expansion remains the primary headline.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Founder Group Limited. News trend score: 100. Reason: 19 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
43
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
19
Technical
16
Valuation
38
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.
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-97%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests dominant **loss aversion**, as traders cling to shares despite a 94.7% three-month decline, evidenced by elevated volume. The narrative gap (3 points) hints at a disconnect between extreme sentiment (100/100) and technical reality, possibly masking underlying caution. Herding behavior may persist due to outsized underperformance, but the absence of panic volatility (0.37x ATR) implies controlled risk-taking. The key question: Will traders exit en masse or hold for a rebound, given the extreme oversold conditions?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 11:51 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Founder Energy Sdn. Bhd. is actively participating in Malaysia’s largest-ever utility-scale solar initiative, the Large-Scale Solar 6 (LSS6) programme"
📈 15D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a clash between cyclical optimism and fundamental caution. At the top end, Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Charles Mackay see potential in its cycle positioning and lack of crowd-driven euphoria, suggesting it may be undervalued relative to its market phase. Meanwhile, Howard Marks (Market Cycle) echoes this mid-cycle appeal, while Benjamin Graham’s *Enterprising Investor* approach acknowledges some discount—but not the extreme bargain his strict criteria demand. The divide widens sharply when turning to defensive or contrarian voices: Graham’s core methodology, Livermore’s trend-following rule, and Smith’s long-term stability test all reject it outright, with Livermore and Smith’s near-zero scores flagging it as a high-risk or unstable bet. Even Fisher, Lynch, and Housel—who prioritize growth, momentum, and patience—see no clear case, while Loeb and Bagehot’s ultra-conservative liquidity and risk assessments dismiss it entirely. The contrast underscores whether this stock’s cyclical tailwinds outweigh its structural weaknesses, with only a handful of methodologies finding any merit.
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
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)
🟢 73
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 66
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 53
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: 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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 34
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)
🔴 29
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 14
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 13
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 8
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
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: 15%
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: 10%
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 282 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.
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.
Gross Margin
11.6%
Operating Margin
-1.8%
Net Margin
-6.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-25.7%
ROA
-4.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.06
Cash
$1.02M
Total Debt
$469.10K
Current Ratio
1.16
Debt/Equity
4.24
Not enough data to compute signals.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.60
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$1.71
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-137.2%
🔴 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% | $-1.82M | $-1.67M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-1.96M | $-1.65M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-2.09M | $-1.61M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-2.18M | $-1.54M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-2.23M | $-1.45M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-1.65M
Terminal Value
$-35.20M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-22.88M
Enterprise Value
$-30.81M
Net Debt
$-550.47K
Equity Value
$-30.25M
*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
$7.05
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 19 positive, 1 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
ChartMill · 4.9.2026
ChartMill · 4.9.2026
ChartMill · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 3.9.2026
ChartMill · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Founder Group Limited (FGL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 37/100, 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.
FGL currently scores 37/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, FGL's estimated fair value is -$1.71, which is 137.2% below the current price of $4.60. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
FGL'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: MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$1.71 vs. price $4.60 (-137.2%); Operating margin: -1.8% (negative); Net margin: -6.4% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for FGL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 10 purchases and 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 395,774 | -395,774 | $0.15 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 107,076 | +107,076 | $0.16 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 355,503 | +93,151 | $0.17 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 93,151 | +93,151 | $0.17 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 262,352 | -15,788 | $0.22 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 15,788 | -15,788 | $0.22 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 25.8.2026 | 278,140 | +232,055 | $0.23 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 25.8.2026 | 232,055 | +232,055 | $0.23 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 46,085 | -71,987 | $0.28 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 24.8.2026 | 71,987 | -71,987 | $0.28 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 118,072 | +76,711 | $0.27 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 76,711 | +76,711 | $0.27 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 41,361 | -146,713 | $0.33 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 146,713 | -146,713 | $0.33 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 19.8.2026 | 15,329 | +15,329 | $0.38 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 18.8.2026 | 61,617 | +61,617 | $0.38 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 31,427 | -31,427 | $0.39 |
| Thien Chiet Chai | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 54,232 | +7,576 | $0.99 |
| LEE SENG CHI | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 112,126 | +17,677 | $0.99 |
| LEE SENG CHI | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 17,677 | +17,677 | $0.99 |
| Thien Chiet Chai | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.8.2026 | 7,576 | +7,576 | $0.99 |
| HRT FINANCIAL LP | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2026 | 24,050 | +24,050 | $0.41 |
| LEE SENG CHI | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 94,449 | +12,500 | $1.40 |
| Thien Chiet Chai | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 46,656 | +5,357 | $1.40 |
| LEE SENG CHI | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $1.40 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
406,154 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 12,418 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 49.6% 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