Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$8.93
▲ $0.19 (+2.1%)
Market data updated: 09/30 06:29 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$857.48M
Day Range
$8.64 - $9.00
52-Week Range
$4.49 - $10.63
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
$5.00
Resistance
$9.00
SG is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+11.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/30 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
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
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$20.33 vs. price $8.93 (-327.8%)
Fair Value
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
49
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
34
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
64
Risk
34
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
21
Institutional
9
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 Sweetgreen, Inc. has focused on its financial optimism and expansion efforts. Analysts upgraded the company’s stock rating to "Overweight" with a $9 price target, signaling confidence in its growth. Sweetgreen opened its first Northeast Florida location in Jacksonville, marking geographic expansion. Additionally, the company launched a new Fall Harvest menu and marketing campaign centered around its maple-glazed Brussels sprouts, reinforcing its brand identity as a mission-driven, healthy fast-casual restaurant.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Sweetgreen, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 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
70
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Investors appear highly excited (70), but evidence of strong fundamental conviction is comparatively weak (40).
Psychology
79
Fundamentals
21
Technical
64
Valuation
38
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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 price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+2%
Market Narrative
88
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
+48
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a narrative-reality gap (63 vs. 40) where optimism (FOMO, herding) coexists with lingering caution due to past losses (-19.2%). Overconfidence in momentum (+5.6% ROC) contrasts with weak fundamentals (-0.4% EPS growth), while loss aversion dominates despite moderate volume. The key question: *Will traders prioritize recent gains or remain anchored to prior declines?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 12:55 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Keybanc upgrades Sweetgreen to Overweight from Sector Weight and announces $9 price target"
"sweetgreen’s first location in Northeast Florida... first-ever Jacksonville location"
"Fall Harvest menu... 'Fall’s Best Dressed' campaign spotlights Brussels sprouts"
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
Jesse Livermore — 75/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with scores ranging from a cautious 69—where Charles Mackay detects early crowd excitement—to a resounding 0, where Morgan Housel flags extreme volatility as a red flag. The middle-ground approaches like Burton Malkiel and John Bogle’s efficient-market view (64) suggest the stock lacks clear evidence of outperforming an index, while Howard Marks’ cycle-based model (53) sees it as mid-cycle but still mixed. Meanwhile, the more conservative voices—from Benjamin Graham (23) to Walter Bagehot (15)—reject it outright, citing weak fundamentals, risk, or liquidity concerns, while the growth-focused investors like Philip Fisher (22) and Peter Lynch (21) dismiss it for lacking their signature traits. The stark contrast between Mackay’s speculative enthusiasm and Housel’s volatility warning highlights whether this stock is a speculative bubble or a high-risk gamble, with most frameworks leaning toward caution.
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 75
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟢 71
A real, well-supported case — deviating from a broad index may be justified here
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 41
No clear edge either way
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)
🔴 31
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)
🔴 22
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 22
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 21
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 18
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)
🔴 15
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 13
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 13
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 6
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 4
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 0
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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 290 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 4 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.
Low 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
-20.5%
Net Margin
-19.7%
EBITDA Margin
-10.0%
ROE
-37.6%
ROA
-17.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.14
Cash
$89.18M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.09
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$8.93
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$20.33
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-327.8%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
13.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.5% | $-135.28M | $-124.11M |
| 2 | 10.8% | $-149.83M | $-126.11M |
| 3 | 8.0% | $-161.82M | $-124.96M |
| 4 | 5.3% | $-170.32M | $-120.66M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-174.58M | $-113.46M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-119.19M
Terminal Value
$-2.75B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.79B
Enterprise Value
$-2.40B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-2.40B
*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
$3.02
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.70
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 29.9.2026
Benzinga · 29.9.2026
Fintel · 29.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Benzinga · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Fintel · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Sweetgreen, Inc. (SG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 49/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
SG currently scores 49/100 (Moderate) 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, SG's estimated fair value is -$20.33, which is 327.8% below the current price of $8.93. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
SG's technical score is 64/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$20.33 vs. price $8.93 (-327.8%); SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin: -20.5% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for SG.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 1 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McConnell Jamie | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 210,489 | -15,033 | $6.21 |
| Cochran Jason Miles | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 207,076 | -4,809 | $6.21 |
| McConnell Jamie | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 15,033 | -15,033 | $6.21 |
| Cochran Jason Miles | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 4,809 | -4,809 | $6.21 |
| Ru Nathaniel | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| SINGER BRADLEY E | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| Blumenthal Neil Harris | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| BURROWS CLIFFORD | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| Moran Montgomery F | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| OSTROFF DAWN | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| Bornstein Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 24,115 | +24,115 | — |
| SINGER BRADLEY E | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 176,922 | +24,115 | — |
| Moran Montgomery F | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 77,870 | +24,115 | — |
| BURROWS CLIFFORD | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 144,435 | +24,115 | — |
| Bornstein Julie | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 70,507 | +24,115 | — |
| OSTROFF DAWN | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 37,870 | +24,115 | — |
| Blumenthal Neil Harris | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 123,287 | +24,115 | — |
| Ru Nathaniel | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 1,809,214 | +24,115 | — |
| Cochran Jason Miles | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 211,885 | -15,038 | $7.99 |
| McConnell Jamie | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 225,522 | -1,401 | $8.00 |
| McConnell Jamie | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 1,401 | +1,401 | $8.00 |
| Cochran Jason Miles | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 15,038 | +15,038 | $7.99 |
| McConnell Jamie | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 225,522 | +1,401 | $8.00 |
| Cochran Jason Miles | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 211,885 | +15,038 | $7.99 |
| GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | Open Market Purchase | 7.4.2026 | 221 | +221 | $5.65 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
25,371,158 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 24,239,006 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
49.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 55.6% 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