Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Basic Materials · ·
$50.10
▼ $0.58 (-1.1%)
Market data updated: 09/15 02:19 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$8.92B
Day Range
$49.74 - $51.18
52-Week Range
$37.81 - $100.25
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
MP is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
-24.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 7.24
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$24.50 vs. price $50.10 (-148.9%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
79/100
Similarity
6
Historical Matches
59/100
Analog Quality
-3.0%
Median 40D Outcome
13/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
67%
+8.7% … +28.7%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
33%
-15.4% … -10.4%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 6 similar historical cases for this stock, 67% (95% CI 30%–90%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +8.4%.
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 67% (30%–90%) | +8.4% | -0.9% … +17.6% | -1.7% |
| 10D | 83% (44%–97%) | +3.1% | +2.2% … +12.9% | -4.1% |
| 20D | 67% (30%–90%) | +8.4% | -4.0% … +23.4% | -2.2% |
| 40D | 50% (19%–81%) | -3.0% | -15.6% … +8.9% | -3.6% |
| 60D | 50% (19%–81%) | -0.7% | -6.0% … +11.2% | -8.7% |
Sample size: 6 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-24 | 79/100 | High Volatility | +29.8% | +14.2% |
| 2026-06-08 | 75/100 | High Volatility | -8.0% | -5.0% |
| 2026-05-20 | 74/100 | High Volatility | +7.8% | +3.6% |
| 2026-04-09 | 67/100 | High Volatility | +28.3% | -6.3% |
| 2026-04-29 | 62/100 | High Volatility | +9.0% | -29.6% |
| 2026-03-09 | 60/100 | Consolidation | -17.9% | +13.7% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLB (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
36
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
4d ago · $51.53
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 0 to 32 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
48
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
30
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 **MP Materials Corp.** highlights its role in the growing demand for **rare earth metals**, particularly amid geopolitical tensions and efforts to reduce reliance on Chinese suppliers. Analysts like Jim Cramer have expressed bullishness on the company, emphasizing its importance in supplying critical materials for electric vehicles, defense, and clean energy—though cautioning investors about slow progress. The broader narrative ties MP Materials to broader trends like "reshoring" and supply chain diversification, as U.S. and allied firms seek alternatives to Chinese dominance in rare earth production.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about MP Materials Corp.. News trend score: 74. Reason: 11 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 7 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
58
Fundamentals
30
Technical
13
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Price (3M)
-18%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for MP exhibits **no dominant psychological state**, with FOMO and panic selling tied at moderate levels but lacking decisive evidence. Overconfidence is the only state with a slight edge, driven by price momentum slightly exceeding EPS growth—a subtle signal that traders may be overestimating near-term gains. The narrative gap (5 points) hints at a disconnect between market expectations and fundamentals, but without extreme sentiment or volatility, no clear bias dominates. The key open question is whether the mild momentum will sustain or fade, given the absence of extreme behavioral signals.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 06:48 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Chinese rare earth suppliers are quietly refusing U.S. shipments"
"Look, we know we need those critical materials. That’s the single best most investable play in the situation."
"governments and manufacturers continue to look hard at alternatives that reduce reliance on traditional fuels. That keeps rare earth elements firmly in focus"
"MP Materials stock has delivered a very strong 3 year return, yet current valuation checks flag a possible premium"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 9D Investor Psychology
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
Walter Bagehot — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing it as a resilient, low-risk opportunity while others dismiss it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—Walter Bagehot’s liquidity focus and Charles Mackay’s skepticism of crowd-driven mania—both suggest the stock could weather crises or lacks speculative bubbles, implying structural stability. Conversely, Fisher’s low score and Livermore’s negative trend verdict highlight a lack of Fisher’s signature growth quality or alignment with Livermore’s trend-following discipline, while Housel’s volatility warning and Veblen’s critique of unchecked growth ambitions further paint it as a speculative or emotionally driven bet. The middle ground, represented by Marks and Nelson, acknowledges moderate risk but sees cyclical positioning as favorable, while Graham’s mixed verdict and the efficient-market skeptics question whether the stock’s merits justify active selection over passive indexing.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 93
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 76
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 53
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 45
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 30
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 25
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)
🔴 22
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 17
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 9
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 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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.
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
-66.6%
Net Margin
-38.3%
EBITDA Margin
-26.8%
ROE
-4.3%
ROA
-2.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.50
Cash
$1.17B
Total Debt
$998.74M
Current Ratio
7.24
Debt/Equity
0.50
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$50.10
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$24.50
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-148.9%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
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% | $-311.72M | $-285.98M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-301.98M | $-254.17M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-298.21M | $-230.27M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-300.07M | $-212.58M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-307.57M | $-199.90M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-328.13M
Terminal Value
$-4.85B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-3.15B
Enterprise Value
$-4.34B
Net Debt
$-167.27M
Equity Value
$-4.17B
*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
$11.63
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$11.59
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 2 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Barrons.com · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Stocktwits · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
MarketBeat · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Motley Fool · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Oilprice.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Motley Fool · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
MP Materials Corp. (MP) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 36/100, 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.
MP currently scores 36/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, MP's estimated fair value is -$24.50, which is 148.9% below the current price of $50.10. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MP's technical score is 13/100, 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: Current ratio: 7.24; Revenue growth (last year): 10.1%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 12.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$24.50 vs. price $50.10 (-148.9%); Operating margin: -66.6% (negative); Net margin: -38.3% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for MP.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 1 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 624 | +624 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 0 | -3,998 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 41,150 | +3,998 | — |
| MYERS RICHARD B | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 7,792 | +3,998 | — |
| WEISENBURGER RANDALL J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 0 | -3,998 | — |
| Lavan Maryanne | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 0 | -3,998 | — |
| MYERS RICHARD B | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 0 | -3,998 | — |
| WEISENBURGER RANDALL J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 150,899 | +3,998 | — |
| Lavan Maryanne | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 23,753 | +3,998 | — |
| MYERS RICHARD B | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | -3,998 | — |
| MYERS RICHARD B | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | +3,998 | — |
| Lavan Maryanne | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | +3,998 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | -3,998 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | +3,998 | — |
| WEISENBURGER RANDALL J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | -3,998 | — |
| Lavan Maryanne | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | -3,998 | — |
| WEISENBURGER RANDALL J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.6.2026 | 3,998 | +3,998 | — |
| WEISENBURGER RANDALL J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| DONALD ARNOLD W | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| McKnight Andrew A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| Rosenthal Michael Stuart | Open Market Purchase | 9.6.2026 | 136,622 | +10,000 | $54.30 |
| MYERS RICHARD B | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| Lavan Maryanne | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
| DUCKWORTH CONNIE K | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 3,038 | +3,038 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
32,111,942 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 28,307,745 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
60.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 54.8% 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