Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$39.09
▼ $1.26 (-3.1%)
Market data updated: 09/19 04:45 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$25.68B
Day Range
$38.32 - $40.41
52-Week Range
$19.48 - $58.78
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$23.38
Resistance
$42.31
SMCI is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-14.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 15/30 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 77.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$255.10 vs. price $39.09 (-752.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (43/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
86/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
-12.8%
Median 40D Outcome
0/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
60%
+5.9% … +34.3%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.6% … -0.6%
🔴 Bearish
33%
-26.9% … -19.4%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 60% (95% CI 36%–80%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +5.4%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
2 occurrence(s) · 0% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 80% (55%–93%) | +3.2% | +1.6% … +5.8% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.2% | -0.9% … +14.0% | +1.1% |
| 20D | 60% (36%–80%) | +5.4% | -10.2% … +27.8% | +1.8% |
| 40D | 33% (15%–58%) | -12.8% | -22.7% … +11.1% | +3.9% |
| 60D | 33% (15%–58%) | -9.8% | -32.1% … +12.7% | +5.3% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-07-24 | 86/100 | Uptrend | -19.4% | -0.6% |
| 2017-08-08 | 80/100 | Uptrend | -0.6% | -24.1% |
| 2017-12-06 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +1.2% | -9.8% |
| 2025-07-07 | 79/100 | High Volatility | +23.6% | +1.8% |
| 2025-09-26 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +5.4% | -32.2% |
| 2018-05-02 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +34.3% | +23.7% |
| 2020-05-15 | 79/100 | ✓ High Volatility | +34.3% | +30.9% |
| 2025-10-28 | 79/100 | High Volatility | -38.0% | -41.2% |
| 2024-07-03 | 79/100 | High Volatility | -20.6% | -50.4% |
| 2025-06-11 | 77/100 | High Volatility | +14.0% | -7.3% |
| 2023-12-01 | 76/100 | High Volatility | +5.9% | +221.2% |
| 2024-05-30 | 75/100 | High Volatility | -1.0% | -32.1% |
| 2023-12-22 | 75/100 | High Volatility | +62.3% | +235.4% |
| 2025-09-11 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +31.9% | -21.1% |
| 2025-10-14 | 74/100 | High Volatility | -26.9% | -43.2% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLK (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
63
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $40.35
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 10 to 43 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
68
Quality
58
Value
43
Momentum
69
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
55
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING SMCI...
Recent media coverage of Super Micro Computer (SMCI) has centered on its stock performance and valuation, with analysts highlighting its competitive edge and cost efficiency compared to peers like Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Headlines emphasize SMCI’s strong market position, undervaluation, and potential for handsomely returns, though some caution that recent margin improvements may be temporary. The company is frequently grouped with other tech stocks like Nvidia and Tesla in broader market discussions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Supermicro. News trend score: 100. Reason: 14 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
35
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
40
Fundamentals
55
Technical
69
Valuation
43
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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)
+27%
Market Narrative
72
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+30
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for SMCI strongly suggests a dominant **euphoric** state, where price momentum, extreme valuation, and perfect sentiment create an environment where investors may overlook fundamental discrepancies. The **narrative-reality gap** (32 points) further indicates a disconnect between market enthusiasm and underlying fundamentals, consistent with overconfidence in price appreciation. The absence of panic selling or loss aversion reinforces the idea that participants are fully engaged in the rally, potentially ignoring risks. The key open question is whether this euphoria will sustain momentum or if a correction will reveal the gap between narrative and reality.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:09 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Super Micro has outpaced the S&P 500 this year, yet its peers left it far behind"
"Buy Super Micro Computer for Handsome Returns & Attractive Valuations"
"Don’t Fall for Supermicro’s Margin Magic: The Company Already Said It’s Temporary"
"What Would It Take to Get SMCI Stock Up to $50?"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 13D 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?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological contrasts: value-focused investors like Walter Bagehot and Benjamin Graham see it as a resilient or attractive holding due to liquidity or defensive metrics, while growth-oriented thinkers like Peter Lynch and Thorstein Veblen highlight its potential for future price appreciation. Meanwhile, risk-averse or late-cycle skeptics—from Howard Marks to Samuel Nelson—flag overvaluation or speculative excess, with some (like Morgan Housel) dismissing it outright as volatile. The divide between high-scoring methodologies (Bagehot, Lynch) and low-scoring ones (Housel, Nelson) underscores whether the stock’s strengths lie in stability, growth momentum, or whether it’s already priced for a speculative bubble.
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 96
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 83
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 66
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 54
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 51
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 49
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 42
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 42
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 35
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 34
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 28
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
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 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 2 bearish · 3 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.
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
10.8%
Operating Margin
7.1%
Net Margin
5.7%
EBITDA Margin
7.2%
ROE
15.4%
ROA
7.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.65
Cash
$7.52B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.87
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$39.09
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$255.10
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-752.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-8.71B | $-8.00B |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-10.40B | $-8.76B |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-11.83B | $-9.14B |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-12.80B | $-9.06B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-13.12B | $-8.52B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-6.97B
Terminal Value
$-206.82B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-134.42B
Enterprise Value
$-177.89B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-177.89B
*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
$20.76
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$20.76
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 14 positive, 3 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Supermicro (SMCI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 63/100, 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.
SMCI currently scores 63/100 (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, SMCI's estimated fair value is -$255.10, which is 752.6% below the current price of $39.09. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
SMCI's technical score is 69/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 77.8%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 94.0%; Net income growth: 112.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$255.10 vs. price $39.09 (-752.6%); SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; ATR: 6.2% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for SMCI.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $40.00 |
| Liang Charles | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $40.00 |
| Liang Charles | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 57,435 | -57,435 | $37.62 |
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 42,565 | -42,565 | $36.60 |
| Liang Charles | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 42,565 | -42,565 | $36.60 |
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 57,435 | -57,435 | $37.62 |
| WEIGAND DAVID E | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 24,093 | +24,093 | — |
| Xiao Jin | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 2,112 | +2,112 | — |
| Malyala Vikranth | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 8,060 | +8,060 | — |
| Xiao Jin | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 2,112 | +2,112 | — |
| Malyala Vikranth | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 8,060 | +8,060 | — |
| WEIGAND DAVID E | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.8.2026 | 24,093 | +24,093 | — |
| Cheung Kenneth | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 2,250 | -2,250 | — |
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 3,650 | -3,650 | — |
| Cheung Kenneth | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.8.2026 | 808 | -808 | $38.28 |
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.8.2026 | 1,970 | -1,970 | $38.28 |
| Cheung Kenneth | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 2,250 | +2,250 | — |
| Liu Liang Chiu-Chu Sara | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 3,650 | +3,650 | — |
| Liang Charles | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 3,650 | -3,650 | — |
| Liang Charles | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.8.2026 | 1,970 | -1,970 | $38.28 |
| Liang Charles | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 3,650 | +3,650 | — |
| Malyala Vikranth | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 6,000 | +6,000 | — |
| Malyala Vikranth | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.8.2026 | 3,053 | -3,053 | $38.28 |
| Malyala Vikranth | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 6,000 | -6,000 | — |
| Thauberger Matthew | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 17.8.2026 | 2,250 | -2,250 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
93,434,920 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 91,425,714 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 49.3% 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