Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$1.42
▼ $0.02 (-1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 07:52 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$15.94M
Day Range
$1.42 - $1.53
52-Week Range
$0.95 - $1.99
Beta
—
Next Earnings
14.12.2026
Support
$1.21
Resistance
$1.87
-24.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/29 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -7.4% (negative)
Fundamental
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.
🗓️ 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
42
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
40
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
50
Risk
20
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
12
Institutional
0
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 InnSuites Hospitality Trust has centered on its financial restructuring efforts and compliance challenges. The company announced a $3 million debt-to-equity conversion in August 2026 to meet NYSE American listing requirements after receiving a non-compliance notice in July. It also reported Q1 2027 net income profit while continuing to explore a potential reverse merger as a strategic alternative to strengthen its balance sheet and operational performance.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about InnSuites Hospitality Trust. News trend score: 68. Reason: 5 of the last 13 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
30
Fundamentals
12
Technical
50
Valuation
50
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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)
-12%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+13
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for IHT strongly suggests **panic selling**, driven by sharp price decline (-16% ROC) and elevated volume (2.9x avg), despite neutral RSI (40). The narrative gap (1-point difference) hints at a fragile equilibrium, where sentiment (74/100) lags behind technical distress. Overconfidence is misplaced, as price momentum contradicts flat EPS growth. The key question: Will traders exit further or pivot to FOMO as volatility stabilizes?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 08:08 AM
What could change this?
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
Charles Mackay — 78/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some traders seeing strong technical or cyclical opportunities while others flag it as a high-risk or fundamentally flawed pick. The highest-scoring models—like Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle analysis and Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology—suggest the stock may be oversold or free of speculative frenzy, aligning with a contrarian or trend-following approach. Meanwhile, disciplined traders like Jack Schwager see a favorable risk/reward setup, reinforcing a structured, rules-based entry. However, the majority of investors—from Howard Marks to Benjamin Graham—pile on warnings, citing middling market positioning, weak growth signals, or outright valuation concerns. Graham’s near-zero score reflects a complete failure of defensive metrics, while Lynch, Fisher, and Loeb dismiss it for lacking growth, quality, or safety. The contrast highlights a tension between short-term cyclical or trend-based strategies and long-term value or quality investing, with only a few methodologies finding any merit in the stock’s current profile.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
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)
🟢 68
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 66
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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)
🟡 50
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 44
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 43
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 32
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 29
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 17
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 3
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
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
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 269 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (5 bullish · 5 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 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
—
Operating Margin
-7.4%
Net Margin
-18.8%
EBITDA Margin
-7.4%
ROE
-48.1%
ROA
-10.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.16
Cash
—
Total Debt
$11.69M
Current Ratio
0.68
Debt/Equity
3.94
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 27.1.2026 | $0.010 |
| 25.7.2025 | $0.010 |
| 24.1.2025 | $0.010 |
| 19.7.2024 | $0.010 |
| 19.1.2024 | $0.010 |
| 19.7.2023 | $0.010 |
| 19.1.2023 | $0.010 |
| 14.7.2022 | $0.010 |
| 14.1.2022 | $0.010 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$0.34
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.34
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 6 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 13 articles.
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 31.8.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
MT Newswires · 1.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 19.6.2026
MT Newswires · 18.6.2026
MT Newswires · 18.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 18.6.2026
InnSuites Hospitality Trust (IHT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
IHT currently scores 42/100 (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.
IHT's technical score is 50/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -7.4% (negative); Net margin: -18.8% (negative); ATR: 7.8% of price.
Yes — IHT 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 24 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 7,983,386 | -25,000 | $32,102.45 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 28.8.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | $32,102.45 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 8,008,386 | -25,000 | $33,000.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 26.8.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | $33,000.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 8,033,386 | -12,378 | $17,372.52 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.8.2026 | 12,378 | -12,378 | $17,372.52 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 8,045,764 | -34,800 | $52,316.70 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 34,800 | -34,800 | $52,316.70 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Other Transaction | 18.8.2026 | 1,829,268 | +1,829,268 | $3,000,000.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.2.2026 | 6,024,613 | -8,822 | $9,407.32 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.2.2026 | 8,822 | -8,822 | $9,407.32 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.11.2025 | 6,033,435 | -7,931 | $10,237.33 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 25.11.2025 | 7,931 | -7,931 | $10,237.33 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 21.11.2025 | 6,041,366 | -7,930 | $10,497.73 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 21.11.2025 | 7,930 | -7,930 | $10,497.73 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 18.11.2025 | 6,049,296 | -10,000 | $13,706.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 18.11.2025 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $13,706.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 17.11.2025 | 6,059,296 | -10,000 | $14,392.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 17.11.2025 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $14,392.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 12.11.2025 | 6,069,296 | -12,500 | $18,090.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 12.11.2025 | 12,500 | -12,500 | $18,090.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 11.11.2025 | 6,081,796 | -10,000 | $14,561.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 11.11.2025 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $14,561.00 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 6.11.2025 | 6,091,796 | -12,500 | $18,363.75 |
| WIRTH JAMES F | Open Market Sale | 6.11.2025 | 12,500 | -12,500 | $18,363.75 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
17,117 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 26,530 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
17.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 43.2% 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