Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Real Estate · ·
$1.24
▼ $0.06 (-4.6%)
Market data updated: 09/30 01:22 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$204.84M
Day Range
$1.24 - $1.33
52-Week Range
$1.24 - $3.93
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$1.24
Resistance
$2.00
RC is a stock from the Real Estate sector — REITs and real-estate companies — highly sensitive to interest rates and property prices.
-69.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/26 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 45.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -23.1% (negative)
Fundamental
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
36
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
66
Quality
50
Value
55
Momentum
10
Risk
20
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
14
Institutional
56
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 Ready Capital Corporation has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings performance, where the company missed revenue and earnings-per-share estimates, reporting a shortfall of $5.45 million in revenue and a wider-than-expected loss. The earnings call highlighted strategic repositioning and a focus on navigating challenges, including refinancing pressures and broader REIT sector struggles. Analysts noted concerns over credit and legal issues, while market reactions reflected broader economic shifts.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ready Capital Corporation. News trend score: 62. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
14
Technical
10
Valuation
55
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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)
-30%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-13
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests herding is dominant, as RC’s underperformance relative to peers (-0.6% vs -0.1%) aligns with investors following broader sector trends rather than independent analysis. The narrative gap (-11) hints at a disconnect between market sentiment (39) and objective reality (50), possibly reinforcing passive positioning. Key open questions include whether the underperformance is temporary or signals deeper structural concerns. The absence of extreme FOMO or panic suggests a cautious, consensus-driven environment rather than emotional extremes.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 05:34 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"reported quarterly losses of $(0.47) per share which missed the analyst consensus estimate of $(0.33) by 42.42%"
"revenue -$5.45M vs $645K est."
"Strategic Repositioning and Path to..."
"Ready Capital Corporation (RC) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript"
📈 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with some models seeing high potential while others flag severe risks. The highest-scoring approaches—like Benjamin Graham’s *Enterprising Investor* (100) and Peter Lynch’s growth-focused model (86)—either dismiss valuation data outright or argue the stock’s price hasn’t yet reflected its growth, suggesting a speculative or undervalued opportunity. In contrast, the lowest-rated frameworks—Morgan Housel (14) and Gerald Loeb (23)—warn of extreme volatility and unsustainable risk, framing the stock as a potential trap for patient investors. Meanwhile, cyclical and value-oriented models (e.g., Samuel Nelson at 78 and Howard Marks at 61) strike a cautious middle ground, noting favorable timing but tempering enthusiasm with concerns about overvaluation or market positioning. The stark contrast underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in its growth narrative (backed by Lynch or Lynchian principles) or its structural flaws (highlighted by Loeb or Housel).
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 95
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)
🟢 94
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 71
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 56
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 53
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 40
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 24
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
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 8
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
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: 15%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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 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
7.9%
Operating Margin
-23.1%
Net Margin
-35.9%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-14.8%
ROA
-2.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.44
Cash
$207.84M
Total Debt
$1.38B
Current Ratio
0.09
Debt/Equity
3.81
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 30.6.2026 | $0.010 |
| 29.6.2026 | $0.010 |
| 31.3.2026 | $0.010 |
| 30.3.2026 | $0.010 |
| 31.12.2025 | $0.010 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.010 |
| 30.9.2025 | $0.125 |
| 29.9.2025 | $0.125 |
| 30.6.2025 | $0.125 |
| 29.6.2025 | $0.125 |
| 31.3.2025 | $0.125 |
| 30.3.2025 | $0.125 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$9.52
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$9.29
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 10 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Zacks · 30.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 29.9.2026
Benzinga · 22.9.2026
MT Newswires · 18.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
PR Newswire · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.8.2026
Motley Fool · 14.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.8.2026
MarketBeat · 9.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Ready Capital Corporation (RC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 36/100, 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.
RC currently scores 36/100 (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.
RC's technical score is 10/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 45.2%; Net income growth: 48.6%; NAV per share: $9.29.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -23.1% (negative); Net margin: -35.9% (negative); ATR: 7.7% of price.
Yes — RC 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 — 5 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Purchase | 29.5.2026 | 2,798.78 | +2,798.78 | $1.82 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 2,798 | -2,798 | $1.81 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 0.78 | -0.78 | $1.82 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Purchase | 29.5.2026 | 1,153,110 | +2,799 | $1.82 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 1,153,109 | -1 | $1.82 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 1,150,311 | -2,798 | $1.81 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | L | 29.4.2026 | 15.36 | +15.36 | $1.81 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | L | 29.4.2026 | 59.19 | +59.19 | $1.88 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | L | 29.4.2026 | 1,150,295 | +59 | $1.88 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | L | 29.4.2026 | 1,150,311 | +15 | $1.81 |
| Scali Dominick | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 26,313 | -26,313 | $1.74 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 27,950 | -27,950 | $1.74 |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 1,148,872 | -27,950 | $1.74 |
| Scali Dominick | Tax Withholding in Shares | 13.3.2026 | 698,499 | -26,313 | $1.74 |
| NATHAN GILBERT E | Open Market Purchase | 6.3.2026 | 30,000 | +30,000 | $1.95 |
| NATHAN GILBERT E | Open Market Purchase | 6.3.2026 | 216,358 | +30,000 | $1.95 |
| NATHAN GILBERT E | Open Market Purchase | 5.3.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $2.02 |
| NATHAN GILBERT E | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 58,252 | +58,252 | — |
| Mielle Dominique | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 58,252 | +58,252 | — |
| Sinai Todd M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 58,252 | +58,252 | — |
| Marshall Meredith | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 58,252 | +58,252 | — |
| Ahlborn Andrew | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 291,262 | +291,262 | — |
| Scali Dominick | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 194,175 | +194,175 | — |
| REESE J MITCHELL | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 58,252 | +58,252 | — |
| REESE J MITCHELL | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 177,168 | +58,252 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,613,189 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 19,407,461 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.7% 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