Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$3.05
▲ $0.02 (+0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/26 08:42 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$45.06M
Day Range
$2.89 - $3.05
52-Week Range
$2.02 - $6.50
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$2.02
Resistance
$3.74
-53.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/33 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
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: 41.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -26.0% (negative)
Fundamental
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
50
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
68
Quality
42
Value
55
Momentum
67
Risk
20
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
9
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 Gogoro Inc. has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings report, highlighting a 7.3% revenue increase and a five-year high in gross margins, driven by new scooter models and operational efficiency. Despite reporting a narrower net loss, the company’s stock fell 15% in pre-market trading, reflecting investor caution amid broader market volatility. Analysts noted profitability progress, but concerns may persist over execution and growth sustainability.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Gogoro Inc.. News trend score: 74. Reason: 8 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
49
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
79
Fundamentals
9
Technical
67
Valuation
55
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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 (3M)
-24%
Market Narrative
76
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+40
🔀 Weak-Conviction Rally
Price is moving, but not accompanied by a matching rise in news attention/sentiment.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant Loss Aversion (97) reflects deep psychological resistance to further declines, likely rooted in the 33.5% drop over three months. Meanwhile, Overconfidence (51) and Confirmation Bias (51) suggest traders selectively embrace narratives despite weak revenue growth, while FOMO (40) remains muted due to neutral RSI and subdued volume. The key tension lies between the reluctance to sell (Loss Aversion) and the disconnect between momentum-driven gains and fundamentals—raising whether traders are holding for fear of losses or chasing short-term gains. The open question: *Will the narrative gap widen further, or will traders reassess fundamentals amid stagnant volume?*
Updated: 09/07/2026, 03:13 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"highest gross margin in over five years, driven by new product traction and improved operational efficiency"
"New scooter models drive margin expansion to five-year high"
"Gogoro Inc. announced that Mr. Bruce Aitken will retire from his position as Chief Financial Officer"
"Gogoro Inc shares fell sharply in pre-market trading despite improved second-quarter financial results"
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 69/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for GGR reflects deep contrasts in how these methodologies evaluate risk, valuation, and market psychology. Howard Marks’ *market cycle* approach sees early-to-mid cycle potential (83), suggesting the stock may still have room to run, while his *general* assessment (46) flags overpricing concerns, highlighting how even the same investor’s frameworks can clash. Meanwhile, Fisher (33) and Smith (13) dismiss it outright—Fisher for lacking his signature quality/growth blend, Smith for its instability—whereas Graham’s *defensive* (40) and *enterprising* (56) scores show a spectrum of valuation tolerance, with the latter still finding *some* room for a bargain hunter. The lowest scores (Loeb, Bagehot) flag systemic risks—capital preservation and liquidity—that contrast sharply with Mackay’s (73) relative calm on crowd behavior, illustrating how macro-level caution clashes with micro-level sentiment analysis.
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 69
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)
🟡 61
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 56
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 52
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)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 45
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 42
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)
🟡 40
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 13
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 8
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 7
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 2
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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 (8 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 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
8.2%
Operating Margin
-26.0%
Net Margin
-28.4%
EBITDA Margin
6.3%
ROE
-73.9%
ROA
-13.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$5.42
Cash
$70.57M
Total Debt
$360.96M
Current Ratio
0.76
Debt/Equity
3.33
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$3.05
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$45.74
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-27.64M | $-25.36M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-26.78M | $-22.54M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-26.45M | $-20.42M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-26.61M | $-18.85M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-27.28M | $-17.73M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-29.10M
Terminal Value
$-430.14M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-279.56M
Enterprise Value
$-384.46M
Net Debt
$290.38M
Equity Value
$-674.85M
*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
$7.34
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$7.34
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 8 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Motley Fool · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Moby · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
InvestorsHub · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 24.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Gogoro Inc. (GGR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, 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.
GGR currently scores 50/100 (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.
GGR's technical score is 67/100, 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: 41.5%; Free cash flow growth: 74.6%; Net income growth: 34.9%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -26.0% (negative); Net margin: -28.4% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for GGR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 4 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yin Chung-Yao | Other Transaction | 22.6.2026 | 9,561,657 | +9,561,657 | — |
| Yin Chung-Yao | Other Transaction | 22.6.2026 | 541,934 | +541,934 | — |
| Yin Chung-Yao | Other Transaction | 22.6.2026 | 9,561,657 | +9,561,657 | — |
| Yin Chung-Yao | Other Transaction | 22.6.2026 | 541,934 | +541,934 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
84,569 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 83,617 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
57.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 67.8% 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