Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$72.36
▲ $0.27 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/19 11:22 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$5.11B
Day Range
$71.43 - $72.66
52-Week Range
$68.70 - $95.07
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$69.16
Resistance
$78.80
-21.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/24 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
🔴 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): 24.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
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
52
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
74
Quality
55
Value
55
Momentum
19
Risk
56
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
66
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Piper Sandler Companies has focused on its stock valuation and mixed analyst sentiment. The firm’s stock, up 158.7% over five years, is now seen as potentially overvalued, with recent downgrades and a 14.1% year-to-date decline raising concerns. Piper Sandler also raised its price target for Chevron due to high oil prices but downgraded Myriad Genetics over profitability doubts. Its Q2 earnings showed strong revenue and margins, though guidance for Q3 was flat, leading to a cautious "Hold" rating. Comparisons with peer brokerage firms were also highlighted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Piper Sandler Companies. 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
14
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
15
Fundamentals
66
Technical
19
Valuation
55
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price (3M)
-12%
Market Narrative
48
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+8
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring bias (46) suggests traders are fixating on the 2.7% resistance level, possibly due to its proximity. FOMO (27) and overconfidence (12) indicate some momentum-driven buying, but the narrative gap (20) hints at a disconnect between optimistic expectations and fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will break resistance or retreat if momentum stalls. Overconfidence may persist if EPS growth lags further, while anchoring could hold unless volume spikes near key levels.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:52 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Piper Sandler Companies stock has delivered a strong 158.7% gain over the past five years, yet current valuation checks point to a stock that screens as comparatively expensive"
"Piper Sandler cuts Myriad Genetics stock to Underweight, citing doubts about the genetic testing company’s path to sustainable profitability"
"Piper Sandler delivered robust 2Q26 revenues and margin expansion, but management guides for flat 3Q26 revenue"
"Piper Sandler has lifted its Chevron price target to a Street-high $243 from $207"
📈 8D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect a clash between value-driven and growth-oriented methodologies. Benjamin Graham, Peter Lynch, and Edgar Lawrence Smith all rate it a near-perfect 100, seeing it as a long-term defensive hold or a growth stock undervalued by the market—aligning with their principles of margin of safety and patient accumulation. Meanwhile, more nuanced or skeptical frameworks like Howard Marks and Morgan Housel temper enthusiasm, noting that while risk is reasonable, the stock lacks the quiet, compounding edge they favor. At the opposite end, trend-following and cycle-sensitive models like Jesse Livermore and Samuel Armstrong Nelson dismiss it outright, flagging overbought conditions or a negative trend, while efficient-market theorists see little evidence of outperformance over passive indexing. The disconnect underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in its fundamentals (for value/growth investors) or its speculative risks (for contrarians and trend traders).
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 100
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 100
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 91
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 84
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 81
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 77
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 74
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)
🟢 73
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 63
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 62
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 51
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 8 bearish · 3 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.
A trading range after a decline, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of an accumulation phase.
Low confidence
$69.16
Range Bottom
$78.80
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
—
Net Margin
14.8%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
20.5%
ROA
10.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$16.89
Cash
$809.41M
Total Debt
$15.00M
Current Ratio
—
Debt/Equity
0.01
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 28.8.2026 | $0.200 |
| 29.5.2026 | $0.200 |
| 28.5.2026 | $0.200 |
| 3.3.2026 | $1.425 |
| 2.3.2026 | $1.425 |
| 25.11.2025 | $0.175 |
| 24.11.2025 | $0.175 |
| 29.8.2025 | $0.175 |
| 28.8.2025 | $0.175 |
| 30.5.2025 | $0.163 |
| 29.5.2025 | $0.163 |
| 4.3.2025 | $0.913 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$77.09
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$53.54
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 5 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Investing.com · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Stocktwits · 10.9.2026
Piper Sandler Companies (PIPR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
PIPR currently scores 52/100 (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.
PIPR'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: Revenue growth (last year): 24.3%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 54.5%; Net income growth: 55.3%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — PIPR has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gallo Ann C | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 22 | +22 | — |
| HOLT VICTORIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 79 | +79 | — |
| Mitchell Robbin | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 42 | +42 | — |
| SORAN PHILIP | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 214 | +214 | — |
| TAYLOR SCOTT C | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 91 | +91 | — |
| Sterling Brian R | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.9.2026 | 33 | +33 | — |
| Gallo Ann C | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 345 | +345 | — |
| Sterling Brian R | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 345 | +345 | — |
| SORAN PHILIP | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 345 | +345 | — |
| SORAN PHILIP | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 81,633 | +345 | — |
| Sterling Brian R | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 104,910 | +345 | — |
| Gallo Ann C | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 8,071 | +345 | — |
| HOLT VICTORIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 76 | +76 | — |
| SORAN PHILIP | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 206 | +206 | — |
| Mitchell Robbin | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 40 | +40 | — |
| Sterling Brian R | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 31 | +31 | — |
| Gallo Ann C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 20 | +20 | — |
| TAYLOR SCOTT C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 87 | +87 | — |
| HOLT VICTORIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 31,863 | +76 | — |
| SORAN PHILIP | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 81,288 | +206 | — |
| TAYLOR SCOTT C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 68,014 | +87 | — |
| Sterling Brian R | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 104,565 | +31 | — |
| Mitchell Robbin | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 15,755 | +40 | — |
| Gallo Ann C | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 7,726 | +20 | — |
| HOLT VICTORIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.5.2026 | 1,875 | +1,875 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,468,339 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,500,823 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 59.2% 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