Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$1.33
▼ $0.01 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 10/08 11:02 AM
Fundamentals updated: 10/07/2026
News analyzed: 10/08/2026
Market Cap
$346.52M
Day Range
$1.32 - $1.36
52-Week Range
$0.83 - $2.00
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$1.18
Resistance
$1.58
THE BOTTOM LINE · IN ONE SECOND
Positive
5 of 10 sources for, 2 against
If right
+4.3%
to the target
If wrong
-7.5%
to the stop
Possible loss is 1.7x the possible gain
🏛️ Legendary investors
2 of 16 would buy
🏭 Industry weight
All the data behind it — below ↓
Not enough similar moments in this stock's history for reliable percentages — so no odds are shown.
🎯 Near target
$1.39+4.3%
🛡️ Support
$1.26-5.5%
🛑 Stop
$1.23-7.5%
💎 Fair value (DCF)
—
⚖️ The jury
10 independent data sources from the site — each one votes
🏛️ Legendary investors who would buy:Samuel Armstrong Nelson · Charles Mackay
🚫 who would pass:Thorstein Veblen · Howard Marks · Jack Schwager · Jesse Livermore · Edgar Lawrence Smith · Philip Fisher
For
Against
The percentages are real frequencies: how many similar past moments were up or down a month later. Every jury vote is computed from the site's own data, no AI. Not a promise and not investment advice.
+19.6% (1Y)
Computed automatically from real price data (swing highs/lows, volume flow) as of 2026-10-07. The lines are also drawn on the chart above. Not investment advice.
Strengths: 4/24 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
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -11.2% (negative)
Fundamental
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
43
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
5d ago · $1.30
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 0 to 30 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
32
Quality
58
Value
55
Momentum
34
Risk
26
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
21
Institutional
100
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.
Everyone's writing about Ring Energy, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🏛️ 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 — 77/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for REI reflects deep contrasts in how these methodologies approach valuation, risk, and market psychology. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score suggests he’d see the stock as oversold and near a cyclical bottom, aligning with his focus on market positioning. In contrast, the overwhelming majority—from Howard Marks to Morgan Housel—flag significant red flags, whether through valuation concerns (Graham, Fisher), risk aversion (Loeb, Bagehot), or structural weaknesses (Livermore’s trend resistance, Lynch’s growth hurdles). Even the efficient-market camp dismisses it as a weak pick, while Veblen’s critique implies speculative overreach. The only overlap is Marks’ mid-cycle caution, but even that’s far less optimistic than Nelson’s bullish tilt, illustrating how REI’s perceived risks and rewards clash across time-tested frameworks.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 77
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)
🟢 71
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)
🟡 57
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
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 39
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 34
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 32
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 30
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 29
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 20
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 16
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 2
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 293 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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
-11.2%
Net Margin
-11.3%
EBITDA Margin
20.2%
ROE
-4.2%
ROA
-2.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.17
Cash
$902.91K
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.61
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$4.08
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$4.08
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 10 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
MarketBeat · 26.9.2026
Yahoo · 26.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
MarketBeat · 21.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.8.2026
MarketBeat · 9.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 6.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
Moby · 6.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
ChartMill · 5.8.2026
Associated Press · 5.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
PR Newswire · 31.7.2026
Ring Energy, Inc. (REI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, 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.
REI currently scores 43/100 (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.
REI's technical score is 34/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Price is above the 200-day average; +16.2% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -11.2% (negative); Net margin: -11.3% (negative); ATR: 4.2% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for REI.
As of 2026-10-07, at a price of $1.34, the nearest support is $1.26, the nearest resistance is $1.39, a stop below support sits at $1.23. The levels come from the stock's real swing highs and lows over the last two years and are recomputed daily. Not investment advice.
Based on real trading volume (Chaikin Money Flow and weekly On-Balance Volume): money flowing out; over the longer term money has been flowing in for 9 months.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 4 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johl Sundip Singh | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 231,000 | +231,000 | $1.21 |
| McKinney Paul D. | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $1.19 |
| Johl Sundip Singh | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 548,460 | +231,000 | $1.21 |
| McKinney Paul D. | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 4,158,463 | +50,000 | $1.19 |
| Johl Sundip Singh | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 317,460 | +317,460 | — |
| Johl Sundip Singh | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.3.2026 | 317,460 | +317,460 | — |
| Dyes Alexander | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 317,460 | +317,460 | — |
| McKinney Paul D. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.2.2026 | 220,014 | -220,014 | $1.26 |
| Young Shawn D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 222,222 | +222,222 | — |
| Dyes Alexander | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.2.2026 | 47,829 | -47,829 | $1.26 |
| Parr James J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 317,460 | +317,460 | — |
| McKinney Paul D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 952,381 | +952,381 | — |
| McKinney Paul D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 559,118 | +559,118 | — |
| Dyes Alexander | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 121,547 | +121,547 | — |
| FEINER PHILLIP B | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 238,095 | +238,095 | — |
| Kwon Rocky | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 132,063 | +132,063 | — |
| CRUM JOHN A | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 683,173 | +119,048 | — |
| HARRIS RICHARD E | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 505,773 | +119,048 | — |
| MITCHELL THOMAS L | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 583,173 | +119,048 | — |
| Petrelli Anthony Benedict | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 889,373 | +119,048 | — |
| Tharp Carla Todd | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 195,225 | +119,048 | — |
| Habachy David | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 383,444 | +119,048 | — |
| FEINER PHILLIP B | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 379,061 | +238,095 | — |
| Young Shawn D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 419,709 | +222,222 | — |
| Parr James J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.2.2026 | 547,348 | +317,460 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
7,666,438 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 7,158,291 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.2% 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
Recent media coverage of Ring Energy, Inc. has centered on its strategic expansion in West Texas’ Central Basin Platform, with a focus on horizontal drilling to drive 10%+ production growth in 2027 while improving capital efficiency and reducing leverage. The company increased its 2026 capital expenditures to $168 million to boost output and prioritize debt repayment amid higher commodity prices. Analysts, however, remain cautiously neutral, with mixed ratings and a modest price target of $2. Earnings calls highlighted its dual focus on growth and deleveraging.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
30
Fundamentals
21
Technical
34
Valuation
55
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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.
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 (3M)
+20%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+23
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
REI’s psychology score (30) reflects a fragmented market, where Panic Selling and Confirmation Bias dominate. The narrative-reality gap (+15) suggests investors cling to optimistic narratives despite deteriorating fundamentals, while subdued volume and negative momentum indicate cautious liquidation. The absence of extreme volatility or herding implies a lack of panic-driven selling, but the neutral RSI (40) and modest ATR (0.95x) suggest a measured, risk-averse stance. The key question: Will the gap between narrative and reality widen further, or will deteriorating fundamentals force a re-evaluation of sentiment?
Updated: 10/02/2026, 06:10 AM
What could change this?
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.