Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · NYSE
$62.74
▲ $0.40 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/15 05:23 PM
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$61.79 - $62.91
52-Week Range
$57.89 - $78.49
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
-6.4% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 2/14 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is below the 50-day average
Technical
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.
SHLD’s overall score of 45 reflects a mixed technical and risk profile, tempered by a strong news sentiment. The technical category is weighed down by persistent weakness—price remains below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, and the recent SMA 50 crossing above SMA 200, while positive, does not yet offset the negative MACD histogram or RSI (36.8), signaling ongoing downside momentum. However, the news category scores perfectly at 100, driven by a steady stream of positive and neutral coverage, particularly around defense/aerospace sector growth and drone-related opportunities, which could support long-term demand. Risk metrics are moderately favorable, with a low ATR (1.7%) indicating stable volatility and a Calmar ratio of 1.44 suggesting resilience in drawdowns, though the 3-year annualized return of 36.6% and 25.4% max drawdown highlight past volatility. The interplay of technical headwinds and robust news sentiment creates a nuanced outlook, where external factors may dictate near-term performance despite underlying risk resilience.
The stock exhibits clear downside pressure, with price below both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, a negative MACD histogram, and an RSI of 36.8, despite a recent bullish SMA crossover. These indicators collectively suggest weak momentum and a potential downtrend, though the ATR (1.7%) indicates controlled volatility.
Technical weakness often precedes further price declines, particularly when momentum indicators like MACD and RSI remain bearish, which could limit upside until these metrics improve.
All five recent news items are either positive or neutral, with a focus on defense/aerospace sector growth, drone technology expansion, and macroeconomic signals that could benefit the company’s core markets. This overwhelmingly favorable narrative contrasts sharply with the technical data.
Positive news sentiment can drive investor confidence and sustain demand, potentially offsetting short-term technical challenges, especially in sectors with long-term tailwinds like defense and aerospace.
The stock demonstrates moderate risk management, with a low ATR (1.7%) and a Calmar ratio of 1.44, indicating efficient risk-adjusted returns. However, the 3-year annualized return of 36.6% and a 25.4% max drawdown reflect past volatility, suggesting sensitivity to market conditions.
While the ATR and Calmar ratio suggest resilience, the historical drawdown highlights potential vulnerability during market stress, which could impact near-term stability.
StockIQ conclusion
SHLD’s profile is defined by a stark contrast between robust news-driven optimism and persistent technical weakness, resulting in a moderate overall score. The defense/aerospace sector’s tailwinds and positive media coverage create a compelling narrative for long-term investors, while technical indicators and risk metrics highlight near-term challenges. The stock’s stability in volatility (low ATR) and historical resilience (Calmar ratio) offer some reassurance, but the current downtrend and underperformance relative to the index suggest caution until clearer bullish signals emerge. Investors should monitor technical recoveries and sector-specific developments to gauge potential shifts in momentum.
Written automatically from the computed data shown on this page only — not investment advice.
🗓️ 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
41
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
17
Risk
58
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of the **Global X Defense Tech ETF** has largely focused on broader defense and aerospace sector trends rather than the fund itself. Key themes include **elevated defense procurement driven by geopolitical conflicts**, particularly Iran-related tensions and sustained munitions demand, which extends earnings potential for defense contractors. Additionally, **geopolitical risks**—such as potential tariffs under Trump’s policies—have raised concerns, while **specific production deals** (e.g., Boeing and RTX’s Pentagon contracts for missile components) highlight growing defense manufacturing activity. Analysts also note **long-term growth opportunities in niche areas like drones and space tech**, though profitability remains uncertain.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Global X Defense Tech ETF. News trend score: 92. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
20
Fundamentals
—
Technical
17
Valuation
—
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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 is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-3%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for SHLD suggests a paradox: extreme positive sentiment (100/100) clashes with weak momentum (-9.0% ROC) and modest volatility (0.88x ATR). While panic selling is the highest-scoring state (22), it’s tempered by neutral volume and low volatility, indicating cautious rather than frantic selling. Euphoria (19) persists despite the stock trading 7.6% below its 200-day average, reflecting a disconnect between narrative and reality. The key question is whether the narrative gap (gap: 4) will widen as sentiment remains detached from technical weakness, or if reality will correct the overoptimistic outlook. The absence of herding or anchoring suggests no rigid group behavior or stubbornness is driving price.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 05:37 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Years of elevated munitions use, intensified most recently by the Iran conflict, have made stockpile replenishment a central driver of defense procurement."
"Boeing and RTX forge agreements with the Pentagon to increase production of key components for missile interceptors."
"Navigating The AI Capex Boom, Growing Bubble Risks"
"Palantir extends post-earnings gains on strong Q2 results."
📈 9D Investor Psychology
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.
🏛️ 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 — 94/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 20/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies here split sharply between bullish and cautious views, with Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s near-perfect score of 95 standing out as an outlier, suggesting the stock’s cycle position is unusually favorable—likely due to technical oversold signals. Meanwhile, Charles Mackay and Morgan Housel’s mid-to-high scores (76 and 75) imply a lack of crowd-driven mania and a quiet, patient-friendly profile, respectively, aligning with contrarian and long-term compounding principles. On the other end, Jesse Livermore’s low score (16) and negative verdict clash entirely, flagging a clear trend violation, while the efficient-market camp (44) dismisses active selection, arguing the stock’s case for outperformance is weak. The middle ground—where scores like Gerald Loeb’s (66) and Howard Marks’ (56) acknowledge reasonable but guarded optimism—reflects a cautious nod to the stock’s merits without overpromising, while the lack of definitive data for Graham, Fisher, or Lynch leaves their frameworks unable to form a clear verdict.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 94
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 82
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 71
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 68
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 68
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 57
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
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 50
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 20
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
Based on the last 274 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 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.
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 29.6.2026 | $0.187 |
| 30.12.2025 | $0.237 |
| 27.6.2025 | $0.119 |
| 30.12.2024 | $0.138 |
| 27.6.2024 | $0.061 |
| 28.12.2023 | $0.071 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 7 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 26.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 24.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 22.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 14.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 3.8.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Global X Defense Tech ETF (SHLD) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for SHLD specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
SHLD's technical score is 17/100, 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: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; ATR: 1.5% of price.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average; MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — SHLD 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 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,181,667 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,088,639 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
42.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 47.0% 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