Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$95.41
▼ $0.51 (-0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/18 05:07 PM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$94.23 - $96.21
52-Week Range
$68.13 - $117.18
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+37.4% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 4/14 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
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 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.
GDX’s overall investor score of 67 reflects a mixed but cautiously optimistic technical and news-driven outlook, tempered by moderate risk factors. The stock demonstrates strong technical resilience, with prices firmly above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, alongside a robust ADX (31.3) indicating a clear directional trend. However, the MACD histogram’s negative reading and the price’s position below the SAR (parabolic stop) introduce conflicting signals, suggesting potential short-term volatility or a weakening uptrend. News sentiment is balanced, with neutral and positive articles outweighing a single negative headline, though the latter—linked to a hawkish Fed stance—could weigh on sentiment if macroeconomic conditions deteriorate. Risk metrics reveal volatility (ATR: 3.6%) and a historically volatile return profile (Calmar ratio: 1.36), underscoring the sector’s cyclical nature and sensitivity to gold price movements or Fed policy shifts.
The stock shows strong uptrend confirmation with prices above key moving averages (50-day and 200-day) and an RSI of 62.3, but the MACD histogram’s negativity and SAR position below price signal potential near-term weakening momentum.
This duality highlights the need to monitor whether the positive trend can sustain itself despite short-term bearish signals.
News coverage is evenly split between neutral and positive articles, with only one negative headline (Jackson Hole’s Fed implications) potentially overshadowing the sector’s broader appeal.
The neutral tone suggests limited immediate panic, but macroeconomic risks could amplify volatility if realized.
The ATR (3.6%) and Calmar ratio (1.36) indicate moderate volatility and historically high drawdowns (38.9%), reflecting the sector’s sensitivity to gold price swings and Fed policy.
Investors should prepare for potential sharp corrections, especially if gold prices or interest rates deviate from current expectations.
StockIQ conclusion
GDX presents a nuanced profile with technical strengths outweighed by mixed signals and moderate risk. While the stock benefits from positive momentum and sector outperformance, concerns about momentum fading and macroeconomic risks create uncertainty. Investors should monitor gold price dynamics and Fed policy closely, as these factors could meaningfully alter the stock’s trajectory. The balanced news sentiment provides some reassurance, but volatility remains a key consideration.
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
62
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 · $105.52
Evidence: attention score 65/100
What happened after
23d ago · $105.52
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
23d ago · $105.52
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 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
84
$105.52
Now
62
$95.41
What happened since
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
54
Risk
50
Sentiment
86
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 of the **VanEck Gold Miners ETF** highlights shifting investor sentiment around gold-related assets amid broader market and Fed policy shifts. Headlines emphasize the underperformance of gold miners compared to physical gold, suggesting a divergence in returns that could influence portfolio strategies. The discussion also ties gold miners to broader macro trends, including Fed rate expectations, Treasury yields, and geopolitical risks, with some analysts framing gold as a potential safe-haven play despite short-term challenges.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about VanEck Gold Miners ETF. News trend score: 86. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
14
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
17
Fundamentals
—
Technical
54
Valuation
—
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+15%
Market Narrative
58
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
GDX’s psychology score (24) reflects detached euphoria—driven by a +10.5% premium over the 200-day average and uniformly positive sentiment (92/100)—rather than FOMO or panic. The narrative gap (13) suggests traders may overestimate tailwinds, while the RSI (58) and moderate volume (0.95x) indicate controlled participation. Key uncertainty: whether the +2.0% momentum persists or if sentiment cools as the gap widens. Overconfidence is absent, but the 6.5% proximity to resistance could test anchoring if traders resist profit-taking.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 11:56 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"‘Owning physical gold and owning the companies that mine it sound like two versions of the same bet, but the returns over the past year tell a wildly different story’"
"‘Gold miners fall 1.9% and Bitcoin proxies sell off after August payrolls beat by 106,000, pushing September Fed hike odds to 60.2%’"
"‘Gold breaks away from real yield rules as central banks dump Treasuries for bullion. Discover why silver could be set to target $100+, but miners haven’t caught up’"
"‘Central bank buying and ETF inflows keep gold attractive’"
📈 8D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 77/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 12/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies diverge sharply on GDX, with Morgan Housel’s score of 10 standing out as an outlier warning against volatility, while Edgar Lawrence Smith (57) and Charles Mackay (54) suggest cautious optimism—Smith due to insufficient dividend/growth data and Mackay noting early crowd excitement. The middle-ground scores (50–53) from efficient-market theorists, Livermore, and Veblen reflect mixed signals: Livermore’s indecision, Veblen’s uncertainty about profit translation, and the efficient-market camp’s weak evidence for active selection. Meanwhile, Graham, Fisher, and Lynch all default to neutral (50) for lack of fundamental data, while Marks and Loeb lean toward risk aversion (40–48), questioning whether the stock’s potential is already priced in or overstretched. The contrast highlights how data scarcity and cyclical concerns dominate, leaving only a few methodologies with any constructive take.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 77
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 67
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 57
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
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
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%
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 42
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 40
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 24
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 12
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 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 6 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.
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 22.12.2025 | $0.633 |
| 23.12.2024 | $0.403 |
| 18.12.2023 | $0.500 |
| 19.12.2022 | $0.476 |
| 20.12.2021 | $0.535 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 6 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
etf.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.9.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) — 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 GDX 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.
GDX's technical score is 54/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend; ROC 12 days: -0.2%.
Yes — GDX 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.
37,194,640 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 38,032,349 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.9% 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