Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Basic Materials · ·
$21.82
▼ $1.67 (-7.1%)
Market data updated: 09/28 11:11 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/28/2026
News analyzed: 09/28/2026
Market Cap
$2.73B
Day Range
$21.79 - $22.64
52-Week Range
$16.44 - $37.37
Beta
—
Next Earnings
12.11.2026
Support
$16.55
Resistance
$27.56
PPTA is a stock from the Materials sector — Mining, chemicals, and metals — the raw materials that feed other industries, sensitive to commodity prices.
+3.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/23 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 51.08
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$21.15 vs. price $21.82 (-196.9%)
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
40
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
32
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
23
Risk
48
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
46
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 Perpetua Resources Corp. has centered on its Stibnite Gold Project in Idaho, highlighting construction progress and favorable legal developments accelerating development. Reports note visible on-site activity, new mineral discoveries (including high-grade gold, antimony, and tungsten), and strong market support amid rising gold prices. While the company reported a wider Q2 loss, analysts remain optimistic about its long-term potential, emphasizing governmental backing and bullish investor sentiment.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Perpetua Resources Corp. - Common. News trend score: 86. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
18
Fundamentals
46
Technical
23
Valuation
38
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+5%
Market Narrative
49
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a narrative-reality gap (5-point divergence) where positive sentiment (86/100) coexists with weak momentum (-2.8% ROC) and modest euphoria (+1.0% above 200-day avg.). The lack of dominant bias (null dominantState) implies a cautious, almost detached stance—likely due to conflicting signals (e.g., positive news vs. underperforming fundamentals). Overconfidence (3) hints at selective optimism, while FOMO (13) and panic selling (5) cancel each other out. The key question: *Is the narrative (sentiment) decoupling from price action, or is this a temporary pause?*
Updated: 09/06/2026, 03:40 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"visible construction progress underway (article 1)"
"high-grade gold and antimony discoveries (article 10)"
"favorable court ruling advancing construction (article 3)"
"Q2 loss widens (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
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for PPTA reflects a clash between macro stability and micro skepticism. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights the company’s resilience in liquidity terms, suggesting it could weather financial stress—an outlier among methodologies. Meanwhile, most value and growth-oriented investors (Graham, Marks, Fisher, Lynch) cluster in the mid-to-low 40s or below, questioning whether the stock’s fundamentals or valuation justify entry, especially with mixed signals on risk and trend. The efficient-market camp and Lynch/Housel outright dismiss it as too volatile or lacking clear growth data, while crowd psychology (Mackay) and behavioral red flags (Veblen) hint at speculative fervor. Only a few—like Nelson and Marks (cycle)—sit neutrally, while Schwager and Malkiel/Bogle’s low scores imply a disciplined pass. The debate hinges on whether PPTA’s liquidity advantage compensates for its lack of clear fundamental or growth justification.
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 94
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
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)
🟡 55
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
🟡 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
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 26
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 24
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 13
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ 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)
🔴 9
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)
🔴 0
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 0
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
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 286 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-11.7%
ROA
-11.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.08
Cash
$714.17M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
51.08
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$21.82
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$21.15
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-196.9%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-116.28M | $-106.68M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-125.73M | $-105.82M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-133.59M | $-103.15M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-139.43M | $-98.78M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-142.92M | $-92.89M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-105.71M
Terminal Value
$-2.25B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.46B
Enterprise Value
$-1.97B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.97B
*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
$9.24
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.24
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 8 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
MT Newswires · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
PR Newswire · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 30.8.2026
MT Newswires · 17.8.2026
CNW Group · 17.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
CNW Group · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
MT Newswires · 3.8.2026
Benzinga · 3.8.2026
Perpetua Resources Corp. - Common (PPTA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, rated "Weak" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
PPTA currently scores 40/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). 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, PPTA's estimated fair value is -$21.15, which is 196.9% below the current price of $21.82. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PPTA's technical score is 23/100, 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: Current ratio: 51.08; +2.6% over the last 3 months relative to the index; Current ratio: 51.08.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$21.15 vs. price $21.82 (-196.9%); ATR: 5.4% of price; Return on equity (ROE): -11.7% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PPTA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dean Robert Alan | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.9.2026 | 69,679 | +907 | $23.42 |
| Malmen Jeffrey L | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.9.2026 | 61,003 | +747 | $23.42 |
| Sternhell Alexander McLeod | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.9.2026 | 60,315 | +747 | $23.42 |
| Cole Andrew Phillip | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.9.2026 | 28,236 | +747 | $23.42 |
| Haddock Richie Darrin | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.9.2026 | 31,913 | +747 | $23.42 |
| Sternhell Alexander McLeod | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 828 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Malmen Jeffrey L | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 828 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Dean Robert Alan | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 1,006 | +1,006 | $21.12 |
| Cole Andrew Phillip | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 828 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Haddock Richie Darrin | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 828 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Malmen Jeffrey L | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 60,256 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Cole Andrew Phillip | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 27,489 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Sternhell Alexander McLeod | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 59,568 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Dean Robert Alan | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 68,772 | +1,006 | $21.12 |
| Haddock Richie Darrin | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.6.2026 | 31,166 | +828 | $21.12 |
| Lyon Mckinsey Margaret | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 2,576 | -2,576 | $29.31 |
| Lyon Mckinsey Margaret | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 6,123 | -6,123 | $29.62 |
| Cherry Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 4,079 | -4,079 | $29.31 |
| Lyon Mckinsey Margaret | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 144,905 | -6,123 | $29.62 |
| Lyon Mckinsey Margaret | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 142,329 | -2,576 | $29.31 |
| Cherry Jonathan | Open Market Sale | 2.4.2026 | 44,895 | -4,079 | $29.31 |
| Malmen Jeffrey L | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.3.2026 | 694 | +694 | $25.18 |
| Dean Robert Alan | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.3.2026 | 843 | +843 | $25.18 |
| Haddock Richie Darrin | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.3.2026 | 694 | +694 | $25.18 |
| Cole Andrew Phillip | Grant/Award from Employer | 25.3.2026 | 694 | +694 | $25.18 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
11,786,380 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 10,989,077 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
65.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 59.0% 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