Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$11.75
▲ $0.01 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/27 03:45 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/27/2026
News analyzed: 09/27/2026
Market Cap
$246.07M
Day Range
$11.38 - $12.06
52-Week Range
$7.15 - $17.75
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
$10.90
Resistance
$17.75
PAMT is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-3.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 1/31 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
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 71.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$28.66 vs. price $11.75 (-343.9%)
Fair Value
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
27
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
14d ago · $13.35
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 0 to 38 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 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
16
Risk
28
Sentiment
26
Fundamental
17
Institutional
50
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 PAMT Corp has centered on its ongoing financial struggles, particularly in Q2 2026, where the truckload carrier reported a $7.4 million net loss—though this marked a slight improvement over the prior year’s $9.6 million loss. Despite an 8.9% revenue increase driven by logistics growth and improved truck productivity, higher costs and industry-wide driver shortages persist, with CEO Lance Stewart noting potential for further rate corrections. Fleet reductions and a $3.1 million one-time auto liability accrual also factored into the results. Investors reacted with a 15% stock decline despite the narrowing loss.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about PAMT CORP. News trend score: 26. Reason: 6 of the last 12 articles are negative, versus 2 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
35
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
17
Technical
16
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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, 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.
Price (3M)
-20%
Market Narrative
26
Fundamental Reality
35
Narrative Gap
-9
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for PAMT strongly suggests loss aversion is the dominant psychological state, likely due to its prolonged 20.5% drop over three months. The muted volume (0.84x average) and lack of euphoric or herd-driven momentum reinforce caution among investors. While panic selling is present at 19, it’s overshadowed by the deeper-rooted reluctance to realize losses. The key open question is whether the stock’s recent outperformance relative to peers (+4.8% vs. -0.8%) signals a potential shift in sentiment or if the narrative gap (-2) hints at unresolved concerns.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:52 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
""consolidated net loss of $7.4 million" (Yahoo, #10)"
""still culling its fleet to get back to profitability" (FreightWaves, #7)"
""improved truck productivity... partly offset by higher costs" (Yahoo, #5)"
""Zacks Initiates Coverage of PAMT With Underperform Recommendation" (Zacks, #12)"
📈 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
Charles Mackay — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some seeing it as a cautiously favorable opportunity while others flag it as a high-risk or overvalued bet. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology analysis and Howard Marks’ market cycle perspective—suggest the stock isn’t caught up in speculative frenzy or overextended, implying a relatively stable or early-cycle position. Meanwhile, Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s cycle assessment leans similarly favorable, reinforcing the idea that the stock might be undervalued relative to its long-term trend. However, other frameworks like Benjamin Graham’s defensive investing and Peter Lynch’s growth-at-a-reasonable-price criteria dismiss it outright, arguing it lacks the deep valuation cushion or growth potential they demand. The middle ground—seen in Howard Marks’ broader valuation take, Jack Schwager’s neutral stance, and even the efficient-market skeptics—highlights a mixed bag: the stock might have *some* merits (like a solid business model) but also carries elevated risks or inflated expectations. Meanwhile, the lowest-scoring methodologies—from Veblen’s growth-for-growth’s-sake critique to Lynch’s outright rejection—paint a picture of volatility, instability, or speculative excess, suggesting the stock fails to meet the patience, stability, or trend-alignment criteria of these investors.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 97
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)
🟢 88
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)
🟢 87
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
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 49
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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)
🟡 41
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 39
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 23
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
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 15
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 14
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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 7
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.
🔴 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.
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
—
Operating Margin
-10.7%
Net Margin
-8.8%
EBITDA Margin
-10.7%
ROE
-25.0%
ROA
-7.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$2.48
Cash
$35.23M
Total Debt
$333.87M
Current Ratio
1.23
Debt/Equity
1.59
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$11.75
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$28.66
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-343.9%
🔴 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% | $-22.23M | $-20.40M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-21.54M | $-18.13M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-21.27M | $-16.42M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-21.40M | $-15.16M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-21.94M | $-14.26M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-23.41M
Terminal Value
$-345.96M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-224.85M
Enterprise Value
$-309.22M
Net Debt
$298.63M
Equity Value
$-607.86M
*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
$9.92
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.92
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 2 positive, 4 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 12 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 17.8.2026
Trucking Dive · 11.8.2026
Yahoo · 11.8.2026
Zacks · 10.8.2026
Yahoo · 10.8.2026
FreightWaves · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
Associated Press · 4.8.2026
Business Wire · 4.8.2026
Yahoo · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Zacks · 16.6.2026
PAMT CORP (PAMT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 27/100, 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.
PAMT currently scores 27/100 (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, PAMT's estimated fair value is -$28.66, which is 343.9% below the current price of $11.75. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PAMT'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: Free cash flow growth: 71.4%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$28.66 vs. price $11.75 (-343.9%); Operating margin: -10.7% (negative); Net margin: -8.8% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PAMT.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 4 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Purchase | 3.9.2026 | 15,695,848 | +3,268,000 | $9.56 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 0 | -3,268,000 | $9.56 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Purchase | 3.9.2026 | 3,268,000 | +3,268,000 | $9.56 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 3,268,000 | -3,268,000 | $9.56 |
| Kleine Daniel C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 20,000 | +20,000 | — |
| Kleine Daniel C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.7.2026 | 21,785 | +20,000 | — |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 1,453 | +1,453 | $10.32 |
| MCLARTY FRANKLIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 484 | +484 | $10.32 |
| Moroun Matthew J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 1,453 | +1,453 | $10.32 |
| Bishop Michael D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 968 | +968 | $10.32 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 6,011 | +1,453 | $10.32 |
| MCLARTY FRANKLIN | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 9,446 | +484 | $10.32 |
| Bishop Michael D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 5,156 | +968 | $10.32 |
| Moroun Matthew J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.5.2026 | 6,011 | +1,453 | $10.32 |
| STEWART LANCE | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.2.2026 | 11,354 | -11,354 | $12.03 |
| STEWART LANCE | Tax Withholding in Shares | 9.2.2026 | 122,552 | -11,354 | $12.03 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Purchase | 11.9.2025 | 2,000,000 | +2,000,000 | $10.75 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Sale | 11.9.2025 | 2,000,000 | -2,000,000 | $10.75 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Sale | 11.9.2025 | 0 | -2,000,000 | $10.75 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Open Market Purchase | 11.9.2025 | 12,427,848 | +2,000,000 | $10.75 |
| STEWART LANCE | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.8.2025 | 100,000 | +100,000 | — |
| Lukas Edwin J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2025 | 954 | +954 | $15.71 |
| MOROUN MATTHEW T | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2025 | 954 | +954 | $15.71 |
| Moroun Matthew J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2025 | 954 | +954 | $15.71 |
| Bishop Michael D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.5.2025 | 954 | +954 | $15.71 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
85,216 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 82,611 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.5% 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