Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$43.72
▲ $2.35 (+5.7%)
Market data updated: 09/27 08:07 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/27/2026
News analyzed: 09/27/2026
Market Cap
$3.15B
Day Range
$40.78 - $43.97
52-Week Range
$16.40 - $63.79
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$30.82
Resistance
$51.85
OUST is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
+52.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 16/29 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 52.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$29.37 vs. price $43.72 (-167.2%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), 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
57
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 · $43.72
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 61)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
4d ago · $39.21
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 12 to 40 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
68
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
78
Risk
48
Sentiment
68
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 Ouster, Inc. highlights its strategic expansion into AI-driven robotics and smart infrastructure, particularly through partnerships like Rev8, Stereolabs, and BlueCity. Key themes include its growing role in autonomous agriculture, with notable collaborations with John Deere’s Guster subsidiary to integrate Ouster’s REV8 lidar into precision farming technology, such as autonomous orchard harvesting. Analysts also discuss its competitive positioning in the physical AI and lidar markets, comparing it to rivals like Aeva, while questioning its stock valuation amid rapid growth.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ouster, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
58
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
44
Psychology
64
Fundamentals
35
Technical
78
Valuation
38
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.
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 (3M)
+4%
Market Narrative
75
Fundamental Reality
44
Narrative Gap
+31
🔀 Weak-Conviction Rally
Price is moving, but not accompanied by a matching rise in news attention/sentiment.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant Loss Aversion (score 49) reflects a market where investors cling to positions despite a -8.2% drawdown, as evidenced by muted volume (0.72x avg). Herding (26) suggests selective buying—OUST outperformed peers (+1.7% vs -0.3%)—but without panic or euphoria. The narrow narrative gap (-3) implies a cautious, fact-based stance. The key question: Will traders exit to lock in gains or hold for recovery?
Updated: 09/05/2026, 06:15 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"‘Ouster’s Rev8 sensors will be integrated into Deere’s autonomous orchard machines’ (Articles 9, 10, 11)"
"‘Ouster broadening into AI, robotics, and smart infrastructure via Rev8, Stereolabs, and BlueCity’ (Article 1)"
"‘Ouster vs. Aeva: which is the better Physical AI lidar bet?’ (Article 8)"
"‘Is Ouster (OUST) stock too expensive after a very large 3-year run?’ (Article 5)"
🧠 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those emphasizing resilience, growth potential, or cyclical positioning and those flagging structural risks or inefficiencies. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights OUST’s liquidity and credit strength, while Peter Lynch and Samuel Armstrong Nelson see it as a growth opportunity or cyclically undervalued—both bullish signals. In contrast, Fisher, Graham, and Livermore dismiss it outright, with Fisher citing lack of quality/growth and Livermore’s trend-following rule working against it. The divide widens when comparing Marks’ mixed but cautiously optimistic view (early-cycle) to Housel’s outright rejection of volatility risk, while Veblen’s low score suggests speculative overreach. Even the moderate consensus (e.g., Smith, Loeb) leans toward caution, revealing a tension between short-term resilience and long-term sustainability.
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 93
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 67
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 43
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 35
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 34
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 28
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 22
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 19
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
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)
🔴 6
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 2 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 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
49.3%
Operating Margin
-43.7%
Net Margin
-35.6%
EBITDA Margin
-39.1%
ROE
-23.1%
ROA
-17.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.07
Cash
$67.41M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.93
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$43.72
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$29.37
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-167.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-81.06M | $-74.37M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-96.77M | $-81.45M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-110.07M | $-85.00M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-119.02M | $-84.31M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-121.99M | $-79.29M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-64.85M
Terminal Value
$-1.92B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.25B
Enterprise Value
$-1.65B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.65B
*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
$4.65
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$4.41
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 5 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Business Wire · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Zacks · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Ouster, Inc. (OUST) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 57/100, 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.
OUST currently scores 57/100 (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, OUST's estimated fair value is -$29.37, which is 167.2% below the current price of $43.72. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
OUST's technical score is 78/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 52.5%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 48.6%; Net income growth: 37.8%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$29.37 vs. price $43.72 (-167.2%); Operating margin: -43.7% (negative); Net margin: -35.6% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for OUST.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 17 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pacala Charles Angus | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 1,041,816 | -30,385 | $33.96 |
| Frichtl Mark | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 318,987 | -18,778 | $33.96 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 245,328 | -15,686 | $33.96 |
| SPENCER DARIEN | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 286,998 | -12,808 | $33.96 |
| Chung Megan | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 189,291 | -11,484 | $33.96 |
| Jacquemet Cyrille | Open Market Sale | 14.9.2026 | 105,538 | -8,896 | $33.96 |
| Chung Megan | Gift | 9.9.2026 | 200,775 | -2,084 | — |
| Chung Megan | Gift | 9.9.2026 | 2,084 | -2,084 | — |
| Frichtl Mark | Gift | 2.9.2026 | 337,765 | -38,745 | — |
| Frichtl Mark | Gift | 2.9.2026 | 38,745 | -38,745 | — |
| Frichtl Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 100,713 | -100,000 | — |
| Frichtl Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 376,510 | +100,000 | $14.22 |
| Frichtl Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| Frichtl Mark | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $14.22 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 283,087 | -17,927 | $44.65 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 261,522 | -8,201 | $46.40 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 269,723 | -13,364 | $45.52 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 261,014 | -508 | $47.09 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 508 | -508 | $47.09 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 13,364 | -13,364 | $45.52 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 17,927 | -17,927 | $44.65 |
| Gianella Kenneth P. | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 8,201 | -8,201 | $46.40 |
| SKAGGS STEPHEN A | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 3,614 | -3,614 | $45.18 |
| SKAGGS STEPHEN A | Open Market Sale | 6.8.2026 | 61,415 | -3,614 | $45.18 |
| SKAGGS STEPHEN A | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 1,386 | -1,386 | $46.48 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,781,618 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 6,896,432 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.6% 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