Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$12.20
▲ $0.36 (+3.0%)
Market data updated: 09/27 05:16 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/27/2026
News analyzed: 09/27/2026
Market Cap
$2.24B
Day Range
$11.80 - $12.44
52-Week Range
$6.79 - $34.17
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$9.43
Resistance
$14.95
NVTS is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+87.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/29 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 32.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$5.30 vs. price $12.20 (-143.5%)
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
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
40
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
60
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
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 Navitas Semiconductor Corporation highlights its strategic advancements in gallium nitride (GaN) and silicon carbide (SiC) power semiconductors. The company has announced the first U.S.-made shipments of its fifth-generation GaNFast technology, produced in partnership with GlobalFoundries at its Vermont facility, targeting AI data centers, industrial power systems, and defense applications. Navitas will also present at the Citi Global TMT Conference, emphasizing its leadership in next-generation semiconductor solutions and domestic supply chain security.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Navitas Semiconductor Corporation. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
31
Psychology
73
Fundamentals
32
Technical
60
Valuation
38
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)
-29%
Market Narrative
70
Fundamental Reality
31
Narrative Gap
+39
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant Loss Aversion reflects a stock deeply embedded in a downtrend (-53% in three months), where investors cling to positions despite muted trading activity. The Confirmation Bias (narrative gap of +24) suggests traders selectively ignore deteriorating fundamentals, reinforcing their existing view. Meanwhile, the absence of panic or herding (scores near zero) implies no collective urgency to exit or follow peers. The key question: *Will the narrative gap close organically, or will a catalyst force a re-evaluation of the stock’s fundamentals?*
Updated: 09/07/2026, 08:23 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Navitas Semiconductor confirmed the first shipments of its 5th Generation GaNFast products from the Burlington, Vermont facility (Article 2)."
"Production now based at U.S. fabs... adds a new domestic source of next-gen power semiconductors for high-performance computing (Article 5)."
"Combining Navitas’ proprietary Gen 5 GaNFast™ technology with GlobalFoundries’ advanced U.S. manufacturing strengthens U.S. leadership in GaN (Article 7)."
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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 8/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for NVTS reflects deep methodological contrasts: Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights its liquidity resilience, aligning with his focus on financial stability during crises, while Livermore’s abysmal score underscores how the stock’s trend clashes with his contrarian, momentum-driven approach. Meanwhile, Nelson and Mackay’s mid-to-high scores suggest cyclical and crowd-free appeal, contrasting sharply with Fisher and Smith’s dismissals—both demand long-term growth and stability that NVTS lacks per their models. Marks’ mixed verdict (split between cycle positioning and valuation) bridges the gap between cautious optimism and skepticism, while Graham’s low scores reflect his strict defensive criteria, leaving the stock far from his ‘undervalued fortress’ ideal. The efficient-market camp’s rejection and Schwager’s ‘no setup’ verdict further emphasize how NVTS fails to fit either passive indexing or disciplined trend-following frameworks.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 68
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟢 66
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)
🟡 47
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
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)
🔴 30
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 23
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 20
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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)
🔴 8
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (6 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 uptrend 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
31.0%
Operating Margin
-234.7%
Net Margin
-254.7%
EBITDA Margin
-234.7%
ROE
-26.4%
ROA
-23.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.57
Cash
$236.86M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
4.99
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$12.20
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$5.30
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-143.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
23.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 23.1% | $-54.63M | $-50.12M |
| 2 | 18.0% | $-64.44M | $-54.24M |
| 3 | 12.8% | $-72.70M | $-56.14M |
| 4 | 7.7% | $-78.27M | $-55.45M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-80.22M | $-52.14M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-44.37M
Terminal Value
$-1.27B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-822.19M
Enterprise Value
$-1.09B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.09B
*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
$2.16
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.11
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 10 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
InvestorPlace · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 2.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
Navitas Semiconductor Corporation (NVTS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, 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.
NVTS currently scores 49/100 (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, NVTS's estimated fair value is -$5.30, which is 143.5% below the current price of $12.20. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
NVTS's technical score is 60/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Free cash flow growth: 32.4%; Current ratio: 4.99; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$5.30 vs. price $12.20 (-143.5%); Operating margin: -234.7% (negative); Net margin: -254.7% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for NVTS.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 5 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saluja Dipender | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 155,087 | +951 | $13.15 |
| Saluja Dipender | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 951 | +951 | $13.15 |
| Saluja Dipender | Grant/Award from Employer | 31.7.2026 | 145,097 | +951 | $13.15 |
| Amoruso Cristiano | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| Fischer Gregory Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| HENDRIX RICHARD J | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| LEE DAVIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| LONG BRIAN | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| Moxam David | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| LONG BRIAN | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 9,990 | +9,990 | — |
| HENDRIX RICHARD J | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 43,845 | +9,990 | — |
| LEE DAVIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 13,420 | +9,990 | — |
| Moxam David | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 32,038 | +9,990 | — |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 17,674 | +9,990 | — |
| Saluja Dipender | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 154,136 | +9,990 | — |
| Amoruso Cristiano | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 34,624 | +9,990 | — |
| Fischer Gregory Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 22.7.2026 | 14,829 | +9,990 | — |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Gift | 2.6.2026 | 6,280 | -6,280 | — |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Gift | 2.6.2026 | 7,684 | -6,280 | — |
| HENDRIX RICHARD J | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 35,165 | -35,165 | $28.14 |
| HENDRIX RICHARD J | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 75,000 | -75,000 | $29.34 |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 73,000 | -73,000 | $28.11 |
| Wunderlich Gary Kent JR | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 35,165 | -35,165 | $28.14 |
| Singh Ranbir | Open Market Sale | 28.5.2026 | 664,058 | -664,058 | $28.72 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
40,298,381 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 39,997,444 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
36.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 32.7% 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