Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$2.57
▲ $0.04 (+1.6%)
Market data updated: 09/26 02:59 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$2.50B
Day Range
$2.53 - $2.65
52-Week Range
$2.52 - $9.69
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$2.52
Resistance
$4.58
-71.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/30 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $17.87 vs. price $2.57 (+595.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -27.7% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
37
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
62
Momentum
19
Risk
40
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
27
Institutional
29
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 Opendoor Technologies Inc. has primarily focused on its expansion into mainstream mortgage lending. The company announced that its subsidiary, Opendoor Home Loans, has exited beta testing and now offers a full range of fixed-rate (15-, 20-, and 30-year) and adjustable-rate mortgages (5/6, 7/6, and 10/6 ARMs) for home purchases in licensed markets. The move signals Opendoor’s broader push into traditional real estate financing beyond its iBuying platform.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Opendoor Technologies Inc. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 7 vs. 7 out of the last 20 articles.
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)
34
Psychology
82
Fundamentals
27
Technical
19
Valuation
62
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-41%
Market Narrative
20
Fundamental Reality
34
Narrative Gap
-14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is dominated by loss aversion, as the stock’s recent decline (-28.7% over three months) and subdued volume (0.68x average) suggest investors are hesitant to crystallize further losses. Herding is modestly active, likely due to relative outperformance today (+0.6% vs. peers), but this is overshadowed by the broader risk-off tone. The narrative gap (-7) hints at a disconnect between investor perceptions (optimistic) and the stock’s technical reality (overvalued fundamentals and weak momentum). The key question remains: *Will the stock’s proximity to support (4.4% above) trigger defensive buying, or will further weakness deepen loss aversion?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:37 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Opendoor Home Loans now offers 30-, 20-, and 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, plus 5/6, 7/6, and 10/6 adjustable-rate mortgages"
"Opendoor edges higher: Is rate relief reaching the iBuyers?"
📈 17D 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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits historical methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: the bullish camp, led by technical/cycle-focused investors like Samuel Armstrong Nelson (93), Charles Mackay (92), and Howard Marks (Market Cycle, 91), who see it as early-to-mid cycle with favorable positioning—either oversold, free of crowd mania, or not overextended. Meanwhile, the value/quality skeptics, including Benjamin Graham (53), Philip Fisher (33), and Peter Lynch (9), dismiss it outright, with Fisher and Lynch citing a lack of growth or quality, while Graham’s stricter tests fail. The middle ground—represented by disciplined traders like Jack Schwager (76) and Walter Bagehot (73)—acknowledges structural strengths (liquidity, reward/risk) but still trails the top-tier bullish scores. The divergence highlights a clash between cyclical optimism and value/growth skepticism, with even the most cautious (like Marks, 67) conceding it’s not obviously risky, while the most critical (Veblen, 12; Smith, 13) flag it as unstable or speculative.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 100
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 96
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 78
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 74
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 73
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 61
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 31
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 31
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 13
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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 9
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 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 10 bearish · 0 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
8.0%
Operating Margin
-27.7%
Net Margin
-29.7%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-129.4%
ROA
-54.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.70
Cash
$962.00M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
7.03
Debt/Equity
1.31
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$2.57
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$17.87
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+595.5%
🟢 Appears cheap 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% | $985.15M | $903.81M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $954.36M | $803.27M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $942.43M | $727.73M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $948.32M | $671.82M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $972.03M | $631.75M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.04B
Terminal Value
$15.33B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$9.96B
Enterprise Value
$13.70B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$13.70B
*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
$1.05
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.99
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 6 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Zacks · 22.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 22.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Stocktwits · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Stocktwits · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Stocktwits · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Opendoor Technologies Inc (OPEN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 37/100, 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.
OPEN currently scores 37/100 (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, OPEN's estimated fair value is $17.87, which is 595.5% above the current price of $2.57. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
OPEN's technical score is 19/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $17.87 vs. price $2.57 (+595.5%); Free cash flow growth: 267.3%; Current ratio: 7.03.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -27.7% (negative); Net margin: -29.7% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for OPEN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 2 purchases and 5 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schwartz Christina | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 3,829,524 | +59,658 | $0.97 |
| Schwartz Christina | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 0 | -59,658 | — |
| Schwartz Christina | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.9.2026 | 3,787,282 | -42,242 | $2.65 |
| Schwartz Christina | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.9.2026 | 42,242 | -42,242 | $2.65 |
| Schwartz Christina | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 59,658 | +59,658 | $0.97 |
| Schwartz Christina | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 59,658 | -59,658 | — |
| Nejatian Kasra | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2026 | 27,625 | +27,625 | $3.62 |
| Nejatian Kasra | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2026 | 83,605,924 | +27,625 | $3.62 |
| Nguyen Giang | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 3,591 | -3,591 | $4.68 |
| Nguyen Giang | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 8,185,543 | -3,591 | $4.68 |
| Benson David C | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 40,000 | -40,000 | $4.83 |
| Benson David C | Open Market Sale | 16.6.2026 | 180,099 | -40,000 | $4.83 |
| Bain Adam | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| HAMILTON DANA | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| Rabois Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| Wu Eric Chung-Wei | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| Benson David C | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| Feder Eric | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 41,667 | +41,667 | — |
| HAMILTON DANA | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 346,844 | +41,667 | — |
| Benson David C | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 220,099 | +41,667 | — |
| Rabois Keith | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 671,755 | +41,667 | — |
| Bain Adam | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 509,034 | +41,667 | — |
| Wu Eric Chung-Wei | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 1,992,303 | +41,667 | — |
| Feder Eric | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 254,202 | +41,667 | — |
| Schwartz Christina | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 74,348 | -74,348 | $4.33 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
213,896,467 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 208,119,929 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
48.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 50.6% 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