Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$15.09
▼ $0.18 (-1.2%)
Market data updated: 09/15 09:07 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$5.04B
Day Range
$14.99 - $15.53
52-Week Range
$12.53 - $58.15
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
RGTI is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-21.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 3/28 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 35.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$3.29 vs. price $15.09 (-121.8%)
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
39
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
40
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
16
Risk
48
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
32
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 Rigetti Computing has centered on its $100 million funding agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce to advance superconducting quantum computing research, driving a 6% stock surge alongside peers. Analysts debate its investment potential, with mixed recommendations—some bullish on long-term growth, others cautious amid market volatility. A CFO’s recent share sale and comparisons with rivals like IonQ also sparked discussion.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Rigetti Computing, Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
20
Psychology
67
Fundamentals
32
Technical
16
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-25%
Market Narrative
54
Fundamental Reality
20
Narrative Gap
+34
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant **Loss Aversion** reflects a reluctance to crystallize losses after a prolonged downturn, despite a recent rebound (+10.5%). Confirmation bias (score 43) suggests investors selectively embrace positive narratives while ignoring deteriorating fundamentals, creating a disconnect between reality and perception. The narrative gap (+33) further amplifies this bias, as traders may cling to optimism despite weak revenue and margin trends. The key open question is whether the recent price rally will sustain momentum or if loss aversion will persist, preventing further upside. Low volatility (0.82x ATR) and subdued volume (0.76x avg) suggest caution rather than urgency in trading decisions.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 01:40 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"$100M funding award agreement with US Department of Commerce to accelerate R&D for superconducting quantum computing"
"Wall Street analysts' overly optimistic recommendations cast doubt on effectiveness, but Rigetti should be added to one's portfolio"
"Quantum Stocks Rally as Commerce Department Takes Equity Stakes: Rigetti Surges 6%"
📈 3D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast in verdicts for RGTI reflects a deep divide between methodologies prioritizing resilience and those focused on growth or trend-following. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights the stock’s liquidity and credit strength, suggesting it could weather financial stress—an approach rooted in systemic stability. Meanwhile, Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) see cyclical opportunity, but even they temper enthusiasm, as the stock doesn’t appear overextended. In contrast, Fisher, Livermore, and Housel reject it outright: Fisher dismisses its lack of signature quality, Livermore’s trend-following rule flags a negative momentum, and Housel’s patience-based framework warns of volatility that could deter long-term holders. The middle ground—where Graham, Marks, and Veblen land—cautions that while the business may have merit, valuation or execution risks temper enthusiasm, splitting between defensive skepticism and cautious optimism.
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)
🟢 86
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 77
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 54
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 42
No clear edge either way
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)
🔴 30
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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
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)
🔴 7
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)
🔴 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 279 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.
High 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
29.1%
Operating Margin
-1194.4%
Net Margin
-3050.4%
EBITDA Margin
-1080.1%
ROE
-39.6%
ROA
-32.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.70
Cash
$44.85M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
37.42
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$15.09
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$3.29
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-121.8%
🔴 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% | $-73.36M | $-67.30M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-71.07M | $-59.81M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-70.18M | $-54.19M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-70.62M | $-50.03M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-72.38M | $-47.04M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-77.22M
Terminal Value
$-1.14B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-741.83M
Enterprise Value
$-1.02B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.02B
*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
$1.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.76
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 10.9.2026
Barrons.com · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Motley Fool · 10.9.2026
Rigetti Computing, Inc. (RGTI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, 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.
RGTI currently scores 39/100 (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, RGTI's estimated fair value is -$3.29, which is 121.8% below the current price of $15.09. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
RGTI'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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 35.8%; Current ratio: 37.42; Current ratio: 37.42.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$3.29 vs. price $15.09 (-121.8%); Operating margin: -1194.4% (negative); Net margin: -3050.4% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for RGTI.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 14 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bertelsen Jeffrey A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | — |
| Bertelsen Jeffrey A. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 25,000 | -25,000 | $15.00 |
| Bertelsen Jeffrey A. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.9.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | $0.60 |
| Bertelsen Jeffrey A. | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 3,860 | -3,860 | $16.89 |
| Rivas David | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 9,038 | -9,038 | $16.79 |
| Bestwick Andrew Joseph | Open Market Sale | 20.8.2026 | 5,791 | -5,791 | $16.81 |
| Bestwick Andrew Joseph | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.8.2026 | 750,000 | +750,000 | — |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 84,944 | -84,944 | $20.55 |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 95,537 | -84,944 | $20.55 |
| Clifton Michael S. | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 94,733 | -94,733 | $12.00 |
| Clifton Michael S. | Open Market Sale | 15.6.2026 | 0 | -94,733 | $12.00 |
| Clifton Michael S. | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 4,361 | -4,361 | $10.91 |
| Clifton Michael S. | Open Market Sale | 12.6.2026 | 94,733 | -4,361 | $10.91 |
| Iannotti Thomas J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 9,208 | +9,208 | — |
| Johnson Ray O | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 9,208 | +9,208 | — |
| Clifton Michael S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 9,208 | +9,208 | — |
| Fitzgerald Alissa | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 9,208 | +9,208 | — |
| Iannotti Thomas J | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 24,110 | +9,208 | — |
| Johnson Ray O | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 180,481 | +9,208 | — |
| Clifton Michael S. | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 512,974 | +9,208 | — |
| Fitzgerald Alissa | Grant/Award from Employer | 9.6.2026 | 43,882 | +9,208 | — |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 5,971 | -5,971 | $21.76 |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 116,217 | -116,217 | $21.28 |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 177,244 | -116,217 | $21.28 |
| Johnson Ray O | Open Market Sale | 8.6.2026 | 171,273 | -5,971 | $21.76 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
58,908,223 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 63,394,520 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
60.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 63.6% 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