Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Finance · ·
$17.52
▼ $0.02 (-0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:42 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$658.23M
Day Range
$17.34 - $17.60
52-Week Range
$15.49 - $27.41
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$17.34
Resistance
$18.71
-25.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/30 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
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $58.07 vs. price $17.52 (+231.5%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -9574.6% (negative)
Fundamental
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
40
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
26
Quality
47
Value
62
Momentum
16
Risk
62
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
51
Institutional
100
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 Tiptree Inc. has primarily centered on its strategic acquisitions and financial shifts. Notably, the company announced a $100 million deal to acquire Universal Shield Insurance Group, a specialty property/casualty insurer, amid declining insurance valuations. Tiptree also reported a Q2 earnings decline, with a loss of $0.17 per share compared to prior-year gains. Additionally, the company secured certified 30% post-consumer recycled (PCR) films from Amcor for packaging. No other significant details were provided.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Tiptree Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 1 vs. 1 out of the last 13 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
13
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
21
Psychology
79
Fundamentals
51
Technical
16
Valuation
62
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
27
Fundamental Reality
21
Narrative Gap
+6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests TIPT’s psychology is dominated by **herding**, as its underperformance relative to peers today (60 score) aligns with coordinated positioning. The **anchoring** bias (41) hints traders may be fixated on support (2.9% away), while **confirmation bias** (10) reflects a disconnect between narrative (29) and deteriorating fundamentals (reality 21). The absence of FOMO, euphoria, or panic signals a cautious, peer-aligned environment. The key question: *Will traders hold or exit as the narrative-reality gap widens?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:23 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
""Tiptree Inc. and Universal Shield Insurance Group have entered into a definitive agreement under which TIPT will acquire USIG""
""Tiptree and Warburg Pincus Announce Closing of Fortegra Sale""
""Amcor supplies Tiptree with certified 30% PCR films""
""Tiptree (NASDAQ:TIPT) reported quarterly losses of $(0.17) per share""
📈 3D 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
Charles Mackay — 97/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 22/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for TIPT reflects a clash between methodologies prioritizing defensive, cyclical, or fundamental stability versus those demanding aggressive growth or trend confirmation. Investors like Charles Mackay and Howard Marks (both scoring in the high 70s–90s) emphasize resilience—Mackay’s absence of crowd mania and Marks’ cycle-pricing comfort suggest a focus on avoiding speculative bubbles or overvaluation. Meanwhile, fundamentalists like Benjamin Graham (Defensive) and Walter Bagehot (liquidity) also rate it favorably, signaling structural soundness, though Graham’s Enterprising Investor variant pulls back, indicating it lacks the deep undervaluation he sought. In contrast, trend-followers like Jesse Livermore and Jack Schwager (scoring 31–38) dismiss it outright, as their rules demand clear upward momentum or setups—here, Livermore’s trend aversion and Schwager’s lack of discipline flags override other signals. Even growth-oriented voices like Fisher and Lynch (scoring 22–27) reject it, as their frameworks require visible expansion potential, which isn’t detected here. The middle-ground approaches—like Morgan Housel’s moderate hold or Smith’s pragmatic ‘reasonable but not long-term’—bridge the extremes, acknowledging potential but without enthusiasm.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 97
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 85
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 77
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 76
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 74
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 69
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 67
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)
🟡 59
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 57
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
🟡 51
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
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
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)
🔴 28
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 27
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 22
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 282 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 9 bearish · 2 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$17.34
Range Bottom
$18.71
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
-9574.6%
Net Margin
7157.2%
EBITDA Margin
-9277.9%
ROE
6.9%
ROA
0.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.93
Cash
$30.78M
Total Debt
$72.09M
Current Ratio
1.88
Debt/Equity
0.14
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 17.8.2026 | $0.060 |
| 18.5.2026 | $0.060 |
| 17.5.2026 | $0.060 |
| 16.3.2026 | $0.060 |
| 15.3.2026 | $0.060 |
| 17.11.2025 | $0.060 |
| 16.11.2025 | $0.060 |
| 18.8.2025 | $0.060 |
| 17.8.2025 | $0.060 |
| 12.5.2025 | $0.060 |
| 11.5.2025 | $0.060 |
| 10.3.2025 | $0.060 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$17.52
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$58.07
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+231.5%
🟢 Appears cheap 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% | $159.81M | $146.61M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $154.81M | $130.30M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $152.88M | $118.05M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $153.83M | $108.98M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $157.68M | $102.48M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$168.22M
Terminal Value
$2.49B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$1.62B
Enterprise Value
$2.22B
Net Debt
$41.30M
Equity Value
$2.18B
*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
$13.54
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$13.54
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 1 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 13 articles.
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
Packaging Gateway · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 30.7.2026
Business Wire · 30.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 29.7.2026
Associated Press · 29.7.2026
Business Wire · 29.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Benzinga · 29.7.2026
Life Insurance International · 1.6.2026
Business Wire · 29.5.2026
MT Newswires · 29.5.2026
Simply Wall St. · 13.5.2026
Tiptree Inc. (TIPT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, 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.
TIPT currently scores 40/100 (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, TIPT's estimated fair value is $58.07, which is 231.5% above the current price of $17.52. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TIPT's technical score is 16/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $58.07 vs. price $17.52 (+231.5%); ATR: 1.9% of price; Debt/equity: 0.14.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -9574.6% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: 0.06 (3y annualized return 2.2% / max drawdown 38.3%).
Yes — TIPT 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 — 7 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.7.2026 | 1,061 | +1,061 | — |
| Smith Bradley E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.7.2026 | 1,768 | +1,768 | — |
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.7.2026 | 116,615 | +1,061 | — |
| Smith Bradley E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.7.2026 | 107,263 | +1,768 | — |
| Ilany Jonathan | Open Market Purchase | 27.5.2026 | 990 | +990 | $17.45 |
| Ilany Jonathan | Open Market Purchase | 27.5.2026 | 193,011 | +990 | $17.45 |
| Smith Bradley E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.4.2026 | 1,907 | +1,907 | — |
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.4.2026 | 1,144 | +1,144 | — |
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.4.2026 | 115,554 | +1,144 | — |
| Smith Bradley E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.4.2026 | 105,495 | +1,907 | — |
| McKinney Scott T. | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 1,232 | +1,232 | $15.98 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Open Market Purchase | 12.3.2026 | 4,000 | +1,232 | $15.98 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Open Market Purchase | 11.3.2026 | 2,600 | +2,600 | $16.15 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Open Market Purchase | 11.3.2026 | 2,768 | +2,600 | $16.15 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.2.2026 | 5,143 | -5,143 | $17.06 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.2.2026 | 15,110 | +15,110 | — |
| McKinney Scott T. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.2.2026 | 15,110 | -15,110 | — |
| McKinney Scott T. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.2.2026 | 105,082 | +15,110 | — |
| McKinney Scott T. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.2.2026 | 99,939 | -5,143 | $17.06 |
| McKinney Scott T. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 20.2.2026 | 0 | -15,110 | — |
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.1.2026 | 2,048 | +2,048 | — |
| Friedman Paul M | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.1.2026 | 2,048 | +2,048 | — |
| Friedman Paul M | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.1.2026 | 122,398 | +2,048 | — |
| Goldwasser Lesley | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.1.2026 | 114,410 | +2,048 | — |
| Mielle Dominique | Open Market Purchase | 7.11.2025 | 5,500 | +5,500 | $18.29 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
878,147 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 804,448 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
41.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 60.4% 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