Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Discretionary · ·
$4.63
▼ $0.16 (-3.3%)
Market data updated: 09/30 11:10 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$55.45M
Day Range
$4.62 - $4.84
52-Week Range
$1.14 - $6.25
Beta
—
Next Earnings
01.12.2026
Support
$3.55
Resistance
$6.25
TLYS is a stock from the Consumer Cyclical sector — Retail, automotive, and leisure — demand rises and falls with economic sentiment and consumers' disposable income.
+124.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 62.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$0.26 vs. price $4.63 (-105.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), 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 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
55
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
68
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
69
Risk
34
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
28
Institutional
8
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 Tilly’s, Inc. has centered on its strong fiscal second-quarter 2026 earnings performance, with comparable sales growth of 12.1% and revenue exceeding analyst estimates, driving a 29.9% premarket stock surge. Analysts also noted margin expansion, though some reports flagged the stock as overbought, raising cautious investor sentiment amid broader market volatility. The focus remains on its financial momentum and retail sector positioning.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Tilly's, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 15 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
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
49
Fundamentals
28
Technical
69
Valuation
38
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, 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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+18%
Market Narrative
57
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+21
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for TLYS strongly suggests FOMO dominance, fueled by extreme volume (3.76x average), bullish sentiment (100/100), and momentum (+12.2% ROC). The narrative-reality gap (42) and overconfidence in price vs. fundamentals (+12.2% vs. +0.6% EPS) imply traders are chasing gains without fundamental validation. The key open question is whether this momentum can sustain itself or if the gap will eventually correct. Mild panic selling (32) and loss aversion (12) hint at lingering caution, but they are overshadowed by the dominant FOMO-driven buying pressure.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 03:32 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Tilly’s shares rose 29.9% in premarket trading after reporting fiscal second-quarter 2026 earnings and revenue above analyst expectations."
"Tilly’s (TLYS) Q2 FY2026 earnings call recap: 12.1% comp growth, margin expansion."
"Tilly’s (NYSE:TLYS) shares moved upwards by 30.7% to $4.98 during Thursday’s pre-market session."
"Company reports 12.1% comp sales increase and 300 basis point gross margin improvement, signaling strong momentum."
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 — 66/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 11/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with only Jack Schwager and Jesse Livermore offering even moderately positive signals—both scoring above 60—while the rest range from cautious to outright dismissive. Schwager’s high score reflects a disciplined, reward/risk-driven approach that sees clear setup potential, contrasting sharply with Livermore’s near-neutral stance, who avoids stocks lacking decisive trends. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch and the efficient-market camp (Malkiel/Bogle) sit in the middle ground, acknowledging growth or potential but questioning whether the price already discounts it or if active picking adds value. The lower-scoring methodologies—from Graham’s Enterprising Investor to Bagehot’s liquidity concerns—paint a picture of overvaluation, risk, or instability, with Fisher and Marks’ cycle analysis flagging it as either lacking quality or late-stage. The debate hinges on whether the stock’s perceived opportunities justify the risks, with only a handful of frameworks seeing enough upside to warrant serious consideration.
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 66
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 59
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 55
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 54
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 46
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 38
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 33
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 33
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 26
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 21
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 19
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 16
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 14
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 11
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 288 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 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
29.7%
Operating Margin
-3.5%
Net Margin
-3.2%
EBITDA Margin
-1.6%
ROE
-20.5%
ROA
-5.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$46.31M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.25
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 6.12.2021 | $1.000 |
| 5.12.2021 | $1.000 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.63
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$0.26
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-105.6%
🔴 Appears expensive 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% | $-559.55K | $-513.35K |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-542.06K | $-456.24K |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-535.29K | $-413.34K |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-538.63K | $-381.58K |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-552.10K | $-358.83K |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-589.00K
Terminal Value
$-8.71M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-5.66M
Enterprise Value
$-7.78M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-7.78M
*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
$2.83
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.83
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 15 positive, 4 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 29.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
ChartMill · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
ChartMill · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Tilly's, Inc. (TLYS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 55/100, 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.
TLYS currently scores 55/100 (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, TLYS's estimated fair value is -$0.26, which is 105.6% below the current price of $4.63. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TLYS'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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 62.3%; Free cash flow growth: 98.8%; Net income growth: 62.2%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$0.26 vs. price $4.63 (-105.6%); Operating margin: -3.5% (negative); Net margin: -3.2% (negative).
Yes — TLYS 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 — 1 purchases and 12 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henry Michael | Open Market Purchase | 21.9.2026 | 50,000 | +5,000 | $4.02 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 5,807,033 | -174,870 | $4.17 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 5,801,933 | -5,100 | $4.24 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 5,983,005 | -34,115 | $4.52 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 6,017,120 | -19,764 | $4.37 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 5,981,903 | -1,102 | $4.50 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 6,036,884 | -377,129 | $4.50 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 7,194,542 | -863,726 | $4.67 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 6,414,013 | -1,330 | $4.36 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 6,415,343 | -252,725 | $4.59 |
| Fund 1 Investments, LLC | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 6,668,068 | -526,474 | $4.14 |
| Cingolani Michael Joseph | Open Market Sale | 11.6.2026 | 11,250 | -11,250 | $5.27 |
| Cingolani Michael Joseph | Open Market Sale | 11.6.2026 | 113,750 | -11,250 | $5.27 |
| Aragones Teresa Luna | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 15,444 | +15,444 | — |
| Relich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 15,444 | +15,444 | — |
| JOHNSON SETH R | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 15,444 | +15,444 | — |
| KERR JANET | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 15,444 | +15,444 | — |
| Collier Douglas P | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 15,444 | +15,444 | — |
| JOHNSON SETH R | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 174,363 | +15,444 | — |
| KERR JANET | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 89,526 | +15,444 | — |
| Collier Douglas P | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 152,511 | +15,444 | — |
| Relich Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 81,018 | +15,444 | — |
| Aragones Teresa Luna | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.6.2026 | 119,110 | +15,444 | — |
| Cingolani Michael Joseph | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.4.2026 | 40,000 | +40,000 | — |
| SHAKED HEZY | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.4.2026 | 40,000 | +40,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
740,326 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 598,979 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
31.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 32.4% 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