Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$15.63
▲ $0.06 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/21 02:24 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/21/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$15.53 - $15.75
52-Week Range
$14.80 - $23.14
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$15.28
Resistance
$18.69
MQ is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-33.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/26 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 23.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $4.73 vs. price $15.63 (-69.7%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (60/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
40
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $15.57
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 43 to 14 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
60
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
16
Risk
48
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
35
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 **Marqeta, Inc.** has focused on its strategic leadership shifts and investor engagement. The company announced Eugenia Gibbons’ appointment as **Chief Product Officer** (August 25) to oversee its product strategy, while also confirming participation in upcoming investor conferences (August 27). Additionally, Marqeta was highlighted among **top mobile payments stocks** (August 24) as digital transactions and embedded finance grow, reinforcing its role as a modern card-issuing platform. No major financial or operational crises were reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Marqeta, Inc.. News trend score: 56. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
63
Fundamentals
35
Technical
16
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
55
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for MQ suggests a dominant **overconfidence** bias, amplified by a 241% premium over DCF fair value and price momentum exceeding revenue growth. Euphoria (score 35) aligns with this, as extreme sentiment and valuation create a disconnect from fundamentals. The **narrative gap** (38-point divergence) further implies investors are prioritizing speculative narratives over reality. The key question is whether this disconnect will persist or if a reversion to fundamentals could emerge. Low panic selling and herding scores indicate no immediate distress, but the extreme valuation gap remains the primary psychological pressure point.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:50 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"MQ and RELY have been added to the Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) List"
"MQ could be among the biggest beneficiaries of mobile payments surge"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 5D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham — 11/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with Peter Lynch’s model standing out as the most bullish—scoring 84 and flagging it as a ‘growth candidate’ where the price hasn’t yet reflected its potential. Meanwhile, Fisher and Nelson offer more cautious optimism, with scores of 73 and 65 respectively, suggesting solid fundamentals but not exceptional quality or a clear cycle advantage. At the other end of the spectrum, Graham’s conservative approach (scoring 11) and Veblen’s critique (21) dismiss it outright, labeling it as either too risky or a speculative growth play lacking substance. The middle ground is crowded with mixed signals: Marks (both cycle and valuation perspectives) and Livermore’s trend-following rule both flag red flags, while efficient-market theorists and Schwager’s disciplined wizards see no compelling edge. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s growth narrative (Lynch’s view) outweighs its valuation risks (Graham’s) or cyclical positioning (Nelson’s), with most methodologies clustering around moderate caution rather than outright enthusiasm.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 84
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 84
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 73
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 70
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 57
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 53
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 51
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 44
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
🟡 38
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)
🟡 36
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)
🔴 21
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 13
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 11
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 9 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.
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
70.0%
Operating Margin
-7.4%
Net Margin
-2.2%
EBITDA Margin
-3.1%
ROE
-1.8%
ROA
-0.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$709.44M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.65
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$15.63
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$4.73
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-69.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-3.8%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -3.8% | $154.68M | $141.91M |
| 2 | -2.2% | $151.24M | $127.30M |
| 3 | -0.6% | $150.26M | $116.03M |
| 4 | 0.9% | $151.65M | $107.43M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $155.44M | $101.03M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$160.79M
Terminal Value
$2.45B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$1.59B
Enterprise Value
$2.19B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$2.19B
*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
$1.65
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.20
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 9 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Business Wire · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
Business Wire · 25.8.2026
Marqeta, Inc. (MQ) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, 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.
MQ currently scores 40/100 (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, MQ's estimated fair value is $4.73, which is 69.7% below the current price of $15.63. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MQ's technical score is 16/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 23.3%; Free cash flow growth: 188.4%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $4.73 vs. price $15.63 (-69.7%); Operating margin: -7.4% (negative); Net margin: -2.2% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for MQ.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sumner Crystal | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 1,250 | -1,250 | $16.27 |
| Gardner Jason M. | Gift | 19.8.2026 | 310,148 | -310,148 | — |
| Gardner Jason M. | Gift | 19.8.2026 | 310,148 | +310,148 | — |
| Gardner Jason M. | Gift | 19.8.2026 | 310,148 | +310,148 | — |
| Gardner Jason M. | Gift | 19.8.2026 | 310,148 | -310,148 | — |
| Cummings Martha | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 713 | -713 | $16.47 |
| Graf R. Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.7.2026 | 6,447 | +6,447 | — |
| Graf R. Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.7.2026 | 6,447 | -6,447 | — |
| Graf R. Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.7.2026 | 21,969 | +6,447 | — |
| Graf R. Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.7.2026 | 6,447 | -6,447 | — |
| Cummings Martha | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 713 | -713 | $16.22 |
| Cummings Martha | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 12,256 | -713 | $16.22 |
| Pollak Todd | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 18,750 | -18,750 | $16.88 |
| Pollak Todd | Open Market Sale | 1.7.2026 | 185,008 | -18,750 | $16.88 |
| Sumner Crystal | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 594,926 | -5,056 | $3.89 |
| Strozek Lukasz | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.6.2026 | 482,536 | +482,536 | — |
| Strozek Lukasz | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.6.2026 | 1,930,156 | +1,930,156 | — |
| CHOKSHI ALPESH | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.6.2026 | 87,482 | +25,592 | — |
| CHOKSHI ALPESH | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 13.6.2026 | 25,590 | -25,592 | — |
| Cummings Martha | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 51,876 | -14,831 | $3.80 |
| Paul Elaine | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 35,602 | -18,148 | $3.80 |
| Atkinson Najuma | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 178,417 | -10,889 | $3.80 |
| Linville Judson C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 165,028 | +45,372 | — |
| Linville Judson C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.6.2026 | 0 | -45,372 | — |
| Linville Judson C | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 65,274 | +65,274 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,870,641 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,104,339 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 45.8% 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