Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$22.38
▲ $0.67 (+3.1%)
Market data updated: 09/23 01:14 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/23/2026
News analyzed: 09/23/2026
Market Cap
$608.27M
Day Range
$22.00 - $22.47
52-Week Range
$19.00 - $36.86
Beta
—
Next Earnings
27.10.2026
Support
$20.22
Resistance
$25.86
-23.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/30 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 2.69
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$8.73 vs. price $22.38 (-139.0%)
Fair Value
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
47
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
6d ago · $22.38
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 11 to 37 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
34
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
52
Risk
56
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
32
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 NETGEAR, Inc. has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings performance, highlighting a beat on revenue and earnings estimates despite a year-over-year decline. Growth was driven by its Enterprise segment, particularly Pro AV solutions and subscription services, while consumer demand remained weak. The company also noted international revenue trends and maintained an optimistic outlook, though overall revenue fell short of prior-year figures.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about NETGEAR, Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 of the last 20 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
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
35
Fundamentals
32
Technical
52
Valuation
38
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental 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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-4%
Market Narrative
70
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
+35
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant Loss Aversion state (46) reflects a market behavior consistent with reluctance to sell after a recent 11.7% drop, despite muted volume. The narrative gap (59 vs. 35) suggests traders may be overestimating recovery potential relative to fundamentals. Anchoring (15) hints at traders holding near support, while Euphoria (17) remains muted due to the stock’s persistent underperformance vs. its 200-day average. The key question: *Will traders accept further losses, or will sentiment shift if support breaks?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 06:22 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"NETGEAR beats Q2 estimates with strong Enterprise growth, EPS $0.16 vs $0.01 expected"
"reported quarterly earnings of $0.16 per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate of $0.01 by 1500 percent"
"Pro AV and Subscriptions Drive Growth"
"Consumer Weakness Persists"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 7D 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
Benjamin Graham — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some seeing it as a rare opportunity and others dismissing it outright. Benjamin Graham’s defensive and enterprising frameworks both rate it highly (94 and 73), praising its statistical discount and stability, while Walter Bagehot’s liquidity focus (91) suggests resilience in turbulent markets. Meanwhile, cycle-oriented thinkers like Nelson (75) and Marks (64) see it as a mid-cycle or oversold play, though Marks’ broader verdict (55) flags potential overvaluation. On the opposite end, trend-followers like Livermore (42) and volatility-sensitive investors like Housel (2) reject it outright, while efficiency advocates (28) and Lynch (12) argue it lacks the growth or mispricing edge they demand. Even Veblen (12) and Fisher (11) dismiss it for lacking the qualitative traits they prioritize, highlighting a stark contrast between quantitative value hunters and those focused on trend, quality, or long-term stability.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 92
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 91
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 71
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 67
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 54
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 51
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 39
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 36
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 32
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
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)
🔴 23
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 12
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 11
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 4 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.
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
38.0%
Operating Margin
-4.9%
Net Margin
-2.6%
EBITDA Margin
-3.7%
ROE
-3.6%
ROA
-2.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.63
Cash
$209.90M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.69
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$22.38
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$8.73
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-139.0%
🔴 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% | $-17.96M | $-16.48M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-17.40M | $-14.65M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-17.18M | $-13.27M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-17.29M | $-12.25M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-17.72M | $-11.52M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-18.91M
Terminal Value
$-279.50M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-181.66M
Enterprise Value
$-249.82M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-249.82M
*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
$17.40
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$14.48
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 11.9.2026
Investing.com · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 10.8.2026
Zacks · 7.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
ChartMill · 6.8.2026
Business Wire · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 28.7.2026
Business Wire · 21.7.2026
NETGEAR, Inc. (NTGR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
NTGR currently scores 47/100 (Moderate) 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, NTGR's estimated fair value is -$8.73, which is 139.0% below the current price of $22.38. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
NTGR's technical score is 52/100, 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: Current ratio: 2.69; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; RSI 51.6 — healthy positive momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$8.73 vs. price $22.38 (-139.0%); SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin: -4.9% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for NTGR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Murray Douglas Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 6,107 | +6,107 | — |
| Murray Douglas Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2026 | 6,107 | +6,107 | — |
| Murray Bryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 4,814 | -4,814 | $24.16 |
| Badjate Pramod | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 2,000 | -2,000 | $24.09 |
| Prober Charles J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 4,598 | -4,598 | $24.16 |
| Badjate Pramod | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $23.45 |
| Badjate Pramod | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 8,440 | -8,440 | $24.16 |
| Murray Bryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 4,293 | -4,293 | $24.16 |
| Murray Bryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 227,499 | -4,814 | $24.16 |
| Murray Bryan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 223,206 | -4,293 | $24.16 |
| Prober Charles J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 426,294 | -4,598 | $24.16 |
| Badjate Pramod | Tax Withholding in Shares | 31.7.2026 | 157,073 | -8,440 | $24.16 |
| Badjate Pramod | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 156,073 | -1,000 | $23.45 |
| Badjate Pramod | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 154,073 | -2,000 | $24.09 |
| Oakes Jonathan Russell | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 10,601 | -10,601 | $23.35 |
| Oakes Jonathan Russell | Tax Withholding in Shares | 30.6.2026 | 74,845 | -10,601 | $23.35 |
| Goli Shravan | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 7,779 | +7,779 | — |
| Durr Laura | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 7,779 | +7,779 | — |
| Butterfass Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 7,779 | +7,779 | — |
| ROBERTS JANICE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 7,779 | +7,779 | — |
| Orvidas Laura | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 7,779 | +7,779 | — |
| ROBERTS JANICE M | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 75,830 | +7,779 | — |
| Durr Laura | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 49,838 | +7,779 | — |
| Goli Shravan | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 33,636 | +7,779 | — |
| Butterfass Sarah | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.6.2026 | 46,732 | +7,779 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,326,692 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,218,168 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
65.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 70.3% 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