Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Utilities · ·
$32.51
▲ $0.04 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:45 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$346.19M
Day Range
$31.91 - $32.66
52-Week Range
$19.83 - $36.47
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$29.00
Resistance
$36.47
SMC is a stock from the Utilities sector — Electricity, water, and residential gas — steady demand and heavy regulation, considered a defensive, dividend-paying sector.
+39.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/29 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 30.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$13.52 vs. price $32.51 (-141.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (82/100), 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 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
51
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
82
Quality
50
Value
38
Momentum
39
Risk
36
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
30
Institutional
33
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.
ports natural gas from Delaware Basin to Texas? Yes (Source 1). * Supported by a long-term transportation agreement? Yes (
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Summit Midstream Corporation. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
25
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
26
Fundamentals
30
Technical
39
Valuation
38
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 stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+13%
Market Narrative
56
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+18
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests **herding** as dominant, with SMC’s modest gain (+0.4%) aligning closely with peers (+0.6%), indicating passive sector participation. The **euphoria** score (27) reflects detached optimism—price remains 12.8% above its 200-day average despite weak momentum (ROC -1.0%), while **overconfidence** (0) arises from price underperforming EPS growth. The **narrative gap** (25) hints at a disconnect between positive sentiment (100/100) and neutral technicals. The key question: *Will momentum diverge, or will herding sustain alignment with peers?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:58 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Summit Midstream makes FID on Double E Pipeline mainline expansion"
"Strong Buy Potential From Improving Leverage And EBITDA Growth"
"TD Cowen raises Summit Midstream price target to $43"
"Summit Midstream Partners Q2 Earnings Call Highlights"
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 — 95/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 1/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on the documented principles of each investor, the model estimates that the wide spread of scores—from Lynch’s strong growth rating of 80 down to Bagehot’s near‑zero liquidity concern—reflects fundamentally different weighting of growth, quality, valuation and risk. Lynch and Fisher, who prioritize earnings growth and company quality, assign high to moderate scores, while Graham’s defensive criteria and Marks’s cycle‑risk lens produce low marks, highlighting valuation and capital preservation worries. Mid‑cycle and crowd‑sentiment gauges such as Mackay, Nelson and Veblen sit near the middle, indicating mixed signals about market enthusiasm versus profit conversion. The overall debate shows that methodologies focusing on growth and momentum see potential, whereas value‑oriented and risk‑averse frameworks remain cautious.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 95
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 80
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 73
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 66
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 51
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 47
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 43
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 43
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 40
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 38
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 31
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 25
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)
🔴 1
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 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.
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
73.5%
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
-1.1%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-1.1%
ROA
-0.2%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.61
Cash
$9.27M
Total Debt
$1.05B
Current Ratio
0.55
Debt/Equity
1.91
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$32.51
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$13.52
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-141.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
12.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.2% | $50.00M | $45.87M |
| 2 | 9.8% | $54.90M | $46.21M |
| 3 | 7.4% | $58.94M | $45.51M |
| 4 | 4.9% | $61.85M | $43.81M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $63.39M | $41.20M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$44.55M
Terminal Value
$999.66M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$649.71M
Enterprise Value
$872.32M
Net Debt
$1.04B
Equity Value
$-163.98M
*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
$45.02
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$32.36
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 6 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Offshore Technology · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
PR Newswire · 31.8.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 29.8.2026
Motley Fool · 18.8.2026
Zacks · 14.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
MarketBeat · 11.8.2026
Moby · 11.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
PR Newswire · 10.8.2026
Benzinga · 10.8.2026
Fintel · 5.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
PR Newswire · 30.7.2026
Zacks · 24.6.2026
Summit Midstream Corporation (SMC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
SMC currently scores 51/100 (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, SMC's estimated fair value is -$13.52, which is 141.6% below the current price of $32.51. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
SMC's technical score is 39/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 30.8%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 87.4%; Free cash flow growth: 446.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$13.52 vs. price $32.51 (-141.6%); Net margin: -1.1% (negative); Current ratio: 0.55.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for SMC.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 2 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnston James David | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 2,600 | -2,600 | $29.72 |
| Johnston James David | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 75,357 | -2,600 | $29.72 |
| PETERS JERRY L | Open Market Sale | 19.5.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $32.00 |
| PETERS JERRY L | Open Market Sale | 19.5.2026 | 16,979 | -10,000 | $32.00 |
| PETERS JERRY L | Gift | 20.4.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| PETERS JERRY L | Gift | 20.4.2026 | 3,733 | -3,733 | — |
| PETERS JERRY L | Gift | 20.4.2026 | 0 | -3,733 | — |
| PETERS JERRY L | Gift | 20.4.2026 | 26,979 | +3,733 | — |
| Connect Midstream, LLC | Open Market Purchase | 31.3.2026 | 1,220,918 | +1,220,918 | $31.08 |
| Downie Jason H | Open Market Purchase | 31.3.2026 | 1,367,397 | +1,220,918 | $31.08 |
| Deneke J Heath | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 59,807 | +59,807 | — |
| Deneke J Heath | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 59,807 | +59,807 | — |
| Johnston James David | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 17,544 | +17,544 | — |
| Johnston James David | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 17,544 | +17,544 | — |
| Mault William J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 18,071 | +18,071 | — |
| Mault William J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 18,071 | +18,071 | — |
| Sicinski Matthew B. | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 5,692 | +5,692 | — |
| PETERS JERRY L | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| Sicinski Matthew B. | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 5,692 | +5,692 | — |
| Jacobe James Lee | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| Oates Rommel | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| McNally Robert Joseph | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| Stone Carolyn J | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| CLEARY JAMES J | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 3,733 | +3,733 | — |
| Deneke J Heath | Grant/Award from Employer | 16.3.2026 | 239,424 | +59,807 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
245,291 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 267,331 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
40.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 41.7% 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