Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$43.22
▲ $0.40 (+0.9%)
Market data updated: 09/16 02:36 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$6.86B
Day Range
$43.08 - $43.38
52-Week Range
$36.17 - $55.27
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
+16.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/17 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
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
Price vs. SMA 200
Price is below the 200-day average
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.
IAUM’s investor score of 57 and moderate rating reflect a mixed but cautiously optimistic outlook, driven primarily by its exceptional growth metrics and favorable sector-specific news, though tempered by technical and valuation nuances. The stock’s growth category stands out with an impressive 206.5% EPS growth and a staggering 461.8% net income growth, signaling strong profitability expansion and operational efficiency. However, technical indicators reveal conflicting signals: while the RSI (52.4) and price position above the 50-day average suggest positive momentum, the MACD histogram’s negativity, price below the 200-day average, and negative ROC (-1.7%) indicate underlying weakness and a potential downtrend. Valuation, with a low P/E of 2.6, suggests undervaluation relative to earnings, but this must be weighed against the stock’s volatility (ATR: 1.9%) and historical drawdowns (Calmar: 1.22). News sentiment leans positive, particularly around energy price surges and gold-related tailwinds, though volatility trends and macroeconomic shifts introduce uncertainty. Overall, the stock’s strength in growth and news sentiment is balanced by technical headwinds and moderate risk exposure, creating a nuanced profile for investors evaluating potential entry points.
The stock shows mixed technical signals: positive momentum (RSI 52.4, above 50-day average) contrasts with negative MACD and falling ROC (-1.7%), while the price remains below the 200-day average and SAR point, indicating a downtrend.
Technical divergence can signal potential reversals or continued weakness, critical for short-term trading strategies.
No explicit fundamental data (e.g., debt, margins, or balance sheet) is provided, leaving this category unscored but implying reliance on growth and valuation alone.
Fundamentals are critical for long-term sustainability, and their absence limits a holistic assessment.
IAUM exhibits extraordinary growth, with EPS up 206.5% and net income surging 461.8%, reflecting robust profitability and operational scaling.
Such growth is a strong indicator of underlying business health and investor confidence in future earnings.
The P/E ratio of 2.6 suggests the stock is significantly undervalued relative to earnings, which could attract value investors despite volatility concerns.
Low P/E ratios often indicate potential for upside if earnings growth continues, but they may also reflect broader market or sector risks.
Sector-specific news (e.g., energy price surges, gold ETF flows) dominates sentiment, with 74% positive influence from commodities and macroeconomic shifts, though volatility trends add nuance.
News-driven momentum can amplify gains or losses, particularly in cyclical or commodity-linked stocks.
Volatility (ATR: 1.9%) and a Calmar ratio of 1.22 (high drawdowns) highlight moderate risk, with a 3-year annualized return of 32.0% offset by potential downside.
Risk metrics are essential for assessing whether the stock’s rewards justify its volatility and drawdown exposure.
StockIQ conclusion
IAUM presents a compelling case for investors focused on growth and sector-specific opportunities, with standout metrics in EPS and net income growth alongside undervaluation. However, technical weaknesses, volatility risks, and the absence of fundamental data create a cautious outlook. The stock’s performance hinges on whether its positive momentum can overcome downtrend signals and macroeconomic volatility, making it a high-risk, high-reward proposition for those aligned with its growth narrative.
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
49
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
66
Quality
No data available
Value
55
Momentum
31
Risk
58
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
50
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 **iShares Gold Trust Micro (GLDM)** has been indirect, focusing instead on broader market trends affecting gold and related assets. Headlines highlight gold’s volatility amid Fed policy shifts, particularly Chair Warsh’s hawkish remarks at Jackson Hole, which triggered a reversal in gold ETF inflows and price declines. Geopolitical tensions in the Middle East—including oil supply disruptions and military strikes—have also driven energy and commodity prices higher, indirectly influencing gold’s appeal as a hedge. Analysts speculate on a potential second-half rally for gold, citing liquidity gaps and seasonal trends, though no direct GLDM-specific developments are reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about iShares Gold Trust Micro. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 8 vs. 8 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
10
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
13
Fundamentals
50
Technical
31
Valuation
55
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+2%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-13
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for IAUM shows no dominant psychological state, with FOMO and panic selling scores muted by contradictory metrics. Negative momentum and below-average price positioning neutralize euphoric or overconfident signals. The narrative gap (2 points) suggests slight misalignment, but no extreme bias is evident. The key question is whether the neutral sentiment (74) and moderate volume (0.93x) will sustain or shift under further technical or fundamental catalysts.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 05:20 PM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Gold and silver prices are stabilizing after what appears to be a market overreaction on Friday to Warsh's surprisingly hawkish message at the Fed’s Jackson Hole gathering."
"Middle East escalation pushes energy prices higher, with oil rallies on Persian Gulf strikes."
"Gold ETF inflows reverse course as Warsh’s hawkish speech crushes GLDM’s summer rally."
"Gold outlook for H2: breakout + seasonality signal a rally, with liquidity gap targets up to $5,400/oz."
📈 7D 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
Peter Lynch — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 12/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Graham's documented principles, the model estimates that the lack of balance‑sheet and valuation data forces a neutral stance despite a perfect score, a pattern echoed for the Enterprising Graham, Fisher, Bagehot and Smith reads. Growth‑oriented frameworks such as Peter Lynch’s, as well as Nelson’s cycle‑position and Housel’s quiet‑compounder view, assign relatively high scores and upbeat verdicts, reflecting optimism about IAUM’s growth trajectory and favorable cycle placement. Conversely, risk‑aware or market‑timing approaches—Loeb, Howard Marks (both business and cycle lenses), Schwager and Livermore—yield moderate to low scores and more cautious or negative conclusions, emphasizing capital risk, potentially inflated expectations, and a negative trend. The divergence across methodologies therefore stems from differing data requirements and strategic emphases, with valuation‑centric investors sidelined by missing fundamentals while growth‑ and cycle‑focused thinkers find more favorable signals.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
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: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 87
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 78
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 71
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 68
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 65
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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%
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 43
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 27
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 12
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
Based on the last 274 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 9 bearish · 1 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.
Gross Margin
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
—
ROA
—
ROIC
—
EPS
$16.95
Cash
—
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 4 neutral, 8 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
iShares Gold Trust Micro (IAUM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
IAUM currently scores 49/100 (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.
IAUM's technical score is 31/100, 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 206.5%; Net income growth: 461.8%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; -0.6% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for IAUM.
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.
7,213,068 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,431,442 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
83.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 80.6% 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