Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$38.16
▼ $0.15 (-0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/26 10:46 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$263.33M
Day Range
$37.21 - $38.34
52-Week Range
$29.39 - $40.60
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$35.59
Resistance
$40.60
+22.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/21 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $61.38 vs. price $38.16 (+60.9%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
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.
🗓️ 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
48
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
No data available
Value
67
Momentum
32
Risk
50
Sentiment
26
Fundamental
51
Institutional
100
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 Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. has primarily focused on its strategic expansion through the completed merger with FSC Bancshares, consolidating its Missouri-based banking operations. Additionally, the company saw positive investor attention following its strong Q2 2026 earnings, with earnings per share rising 20.45% year-over-year and revenue increasing, alongside a cash dividend announcement. Analyst comparisons with rival community banks like Ames National also highlighted its growth potential.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc.. News trend score: 26. Reason: 8 of the last 16 articles are negative, versus 4 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
24
Fundamentals
51
Technical
32
Valuation
67
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
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)
-5%
Market Narrative
18
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-32
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior (72) reflects traders’ fixation on the 1.4% resistance gap, likely due to its proximity. Herding (31) is present but selective, as the stock outperformed peers today. Low FOMO (21) and muted volatility (0.82x ATR) indicate cautious, non-emotional participation. The narrative gap (-26) suggests traders underestimate the stock’s undervaluation (-35% vs. DCF), reinforcing anchoring. The key question: will traders break the resistance anchor, or will the undervaluation narrative finally attract broader attention?
Updated: 09/05/2026, 04:22 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Hawthorn Bancshares completed the merger of FSC Bancshares with and into Hawthorn"
"Hawthorn Bancshares reported quarterly earnings of $1.06 per share, a 20.45% increase YoY"
"Hawthorn Bancshares announces cash dividend"
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
Peter Lynch — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 30/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast between Peter Lynch’s and Philip Fisher’s verdicts highlights how different methodologies prioritize signals. Lynch’s near-perfect score reflects his focus on *growth potential*—here, he sees the stock’s price lagging behind its underlying expansion, a classic Lynchian playbook. Meanwhile, Fisher’s low score stems from insufficient fundamental data, as his approach demands deep, qualitative analysis of management and industry trends, which may not yet be evident. On the other end, defensive investors like Benjamin Graham (Defensive) and Howard Marks (Risk) see moderate appeal, with Graham’s 84 score suggesting it meets his margin-of-safety criteria, while Marks’ 75 acknowledges controlled risk. Meanwhile, cyclical analysts like Nelson and Livermore diverge sharply—Nelson flags overbought conditions, while Livermore’s 57 score signals indecision, as his trend-following discipline prefers clarity. The efficient-market camp (Malkiel/Bogle) and Schwager’s quantitative wizards both dismiss the stock outright, questioning its alpha potential or setup discipline, while Smith and Bagehot’s neutral stances stem from data gaps. The debate thus hinges on whether the stock’s growth justifies Lynch’s enthusiasm or if its cyclicality and lack of Fisherian fundamentals make it a speculative bet.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 100
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 93
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 89
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 76
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 73
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 69
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)
🟢 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
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%
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 47
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 47
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 46
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 30
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 4
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
Based on the last 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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.
A trading range after an advance, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of a distribution phase.
Low confidence
$35.59
Range Bottom
$40.60
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
13.7%
ROA
1.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.44
Cash
$104.31M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 15.9.2026 | $0.210 |
| 15.6.2026 | $0.210 |
| 14.6.2026 | $0.210 |
| 13.3.2026 | $0.210 |
| 12.3.2026 | $0.210 |
| 15.12.2025 | $0.200 |
| 14.12.2025 | $0.200 |
| 15.9.2025 | $0.200 |
| 14.9.2025 | $0.200 |
| 13.6.2025 | $0.200 |
| 12.6.2025 | $0.200 |
| 14.3.2025 | $0.190 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$38.16
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$61.38
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+60.9%
🟢 Appears cheap 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% | $25.13M | $23.05M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $27.17M | $22.87M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $28.86M | $22.29M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $30.13M | $21.34M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $30.88M | $20.07M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$22.84M
Terminal Value
$486.96M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$316.49M
Enterprise Value
$426.11M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$426.11M
*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
$25.10
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$25.10
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 4 positive, 4 neutral, 8 negative out of the last 16 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 25.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
Associated Press · 29.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 29.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 29.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Zacks · 14.7.2026
Motley Fool · 20.5.2026
Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. (HWBK) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 48/100, 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.
HWBK currently scores 48/100 (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, HWBK's estimated fair value is $61.38, which is 60.9% above the current price of $38.16. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
HWBK's technical score is 32/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $61.38 vs. price $38.16 (+60.9%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 31.4%; Net income growth: 30.4%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; -11.0% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Yes — HWBK 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 — 4 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 5,424 | +654 | $38.20 |
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Open Market Purchase | 27.8.2026 | 654.448 | +654.448 | $38.20 |
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Open Market Purchase | 26.8.2026 | 4,769 | +645 | $38.75 |
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Open Market Purchase | 26.8.2026 | 645.161 | +645.161 | $38.75 |
| Burcham James Grant | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| RILEY KEVIN L | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| States Jonathan L | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Burkhead Frank E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Eden Douglas Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Holtaway Jonathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| FREEMAN PHILIP D | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| TURNER DAVID T | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Wetzel Gus Seitter III | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| RILEY KEVIN L | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| FREEMAN PHILIP D | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| TURNER DAVID T | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Burkhead Frank E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Wetzel Gus Seitter III | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Holtaway Jonathan | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Eden Douglas Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| States Jonathan L | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Hettinger Shawna M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| Burcham James Grant | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 500 | +500 | — |
| GILES BRENT M | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.5.2026 | 6,849 | +6,849 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
149,399 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 122,155 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 66.2% 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