Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$2.40
▲ $0.25 (+11.4%)
Market data updated: 09/28 07:11 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/28/2026
News analyzed: 09/28/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$2.11 - $2.47
52-Week Range
$2.10 - $5.75
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.12.2026
Support
$2.10
Resistance
$4.42
SFIX is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
-54.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/28 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
🔴 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: 59.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $1.95 vs. price $2.40 (-18.5%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (76/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
37
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
4d ago · $2.22
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 28 to 2 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
4d ago · $2.22
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 24 to 73 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
76
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
6
Risk
34
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
31
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 Stitch Fix, Inc. has centered on its upcoming financial results for its fourth quarter and full fiscal year 2026, scheduled for release on September 23, 2026, with analysts anticipating a potential slight sales miss. UBS has adjusted its price target to $4 from $4.50 while maintaining a neutral rating, reflecting cautious optimism. The company’s focus on growth through category expansion and AI-driven personalization has also been highlighted, positioning it as a beneficiary of the broader AI-driven retail trends.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Stitch Fix, Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 7 vs. 7 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
57
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
67
Fundamentals
31
Technical
6
Valuation
38
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Price (3M)
-53%
Market Narrative
38
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
-3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests herding dominates, as SFIX’s underperformance relative to peers (-2.6% vs. -2.3%) aligns with passive alignment rather than independent conviction. Anchoring (66) and loss aversion (40) indicate traders may cling to near-term support (1.7% away), while the narrative-reality gap (21) hints at selective attention to positive narratives despite weak fundamentals. Overconfidence (45) and euphoria (31) are muted by extreme valuation (+212% above DCF) and oversold conditions (RSI 29). The key question: *Will traders exit en masse at support or double down on herd momentum?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:29 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"UBS analyst Jay Sole maintains Stitch Fix with a Neutral and lowers the price target from $4.5 to $4."
"Stitch Fix Could Post 'Slight' Fiscal Q4 Sales Miss, UBS Says"
"Stitch Fix Boosts Growth With Category Expansion & AI Personalization"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 17D 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
Gerald M. Loeb — 24/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between those favoring a tactical or cyclical opportunity and those warning of overvaluation or fundamental risks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score suggests the stock sits in a favorable cycle phase, while Jack Schwager and Howard Marks (cycle) also see disciplined setups with room for upside. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch and Howard Marks (general) acknowledge growth but question whether the price has already priced it in, reflecting a cautionary middle ground. On the other end, Fisher, Housel, and Smith reject the stock outright—Fisher for lacking his signature quality, Housel for volatility, and Smith for instability—while Graham and Livermore flag it as fundamentally weak or contrary to trend-based rules. The divide underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in timing (Nelson, Schwager) or whether its risks (Livermore, Bogle) outweigh any potential rewards.
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 93
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 90
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 73
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 63
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)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 55
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 43
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 41
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 37
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 31
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 30
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 27
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 24
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
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 (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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
43.7%
Operating Margin
-1.6%
Net Margin
-0.9%
EBITDA Margin
0.1%
ROE
-6.4%
ROA
-2.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.09
Cash
$95.30M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.48
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$2.40
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$1.95
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-18.5%
🔴 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% | $18.86M | $17.30M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $18.28M | $15.38M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $18.05M | $13.94M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $18.17M | $12.87M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $18.62M | $12.10M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$19.85M
Terminal Value
$293.64M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$190.85M
Enterprise Value
$262.45M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$262.45M
*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
$1.46
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.46
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 6 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
ChartMill · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
ChartMill · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Stitch Fix, Inc. (SFIX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 37/100, 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.
SFIX currently scores 37/100 (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, SFIX's estimated fair value is $1.95, which is 18.5% below the current price of $2.40. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
SFIX's technical score is 6/100, 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: 59.1%; Free cash flow growth: 113.8%; Net income growth: 56.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $1.95 vs. price $2.40 (-18.5%); Operating margin: -1.6% (negative); Net margin: -0.9% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for SFIX.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baer Matt | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 725,578 | -61,452 | — |
| Aufderhaar David | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 1,146,264 | +43,895 | — |
| O'Connor Casey | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.9.2026 | 428,903 | -25,999 | $2.94 |
| O'Connor Casey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 101,196 | -25,284 | — |
| O'Connor Casey | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 454,902 | +25,284 | — |
| Aufderhaar David | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 175,687 | -43,895 | — |
| Aufderhaar David | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.9.2026 | 1,083,599 | -62,665 | $2.94 |
| Baer Matt | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.9.2026 | 1,956,130 | -115,062 | $2.94 |
| Baer Matt | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 16.9.2026 | 2,071,192 | +61,452 | — |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 20,000 | -20,000 | $4.09 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | — |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $2.48 |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | $4.09 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 1,021,994 | +50,000 | $2.48 |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 971,994 | -50,000 | $4.09 |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 951,994 | -20,000 | $4.09 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 322,543 | -50,000 | — |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 971,994 | -20,000 | $3.74 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.7.2026 | 372,543 | -50,000 | — |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.7.2026 | 1,041,994 | +50,000 | $2.48 |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 991,994 | -50,000 | $3.77 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.7.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | — |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 20,000 | -20,000 | $3.74 |
| Bacos Anthony | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 27.7.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $2.48 |
| Bacos Anthony | Open Market Sale | 27.7.2026 | 50,000 | -50,000 | $3.77 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,594,556 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 13,364,356 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
51.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.4% 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