Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$4.17
▼ $0.09 (-2.1%)
Market data updated: 10/01 12:52 AM
Fundamentals updated: 10/01/2026
News analyzed: 10/01/2026
Market Cap
$624.12M
Day Range
$4.17 - $4.41
52-Week Range
$4.16 - $19.71
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
Support
$4.16
Resistance
$7.03
UAMY is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-34.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/31 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 162.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$7.49 vs. price $4.17 (-279.7%)
Fair Value
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
39
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 · $4.17
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 4 to 31 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
40
Quality
63
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
54
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
36
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 United States Antimony Corporation (USAC) has focused on its role as a critical supplier of antimony and other minerals, particularly its third-quarter shipments to the U.S. Department of Defense, positioning it as a key player in national security and defense contracts. The company has emphasized its status as the only fully integrated antimony producer outside China and Russia, alongside projections of strong market growth—anticipating a doubling of the global antimony market to $4.5 billion by 2036. CEO Gary Evans has repeatedly highlighted USAC’s potential for "phenomenal growth" over the next two years, while permitting challenges and industry trends remain central themes.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about United States Antimony Corporation. News trend score: 74. Reason: 7 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
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
44
Psychology
97
Fundamentals
36
Technical
13
Valuation
38
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-46%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
44
Narrative Gap
-2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant Loss Aversion (73) reflects a defensive stance after a steep 32.6% drop, where traders hesitate to lock in losses despite subdued volume. Herding (43) hints at cautious peer alignment, but FOMO and panic remain muted due to weak momentum (-9.2% ROC) and neutral sentiment. The key question: Will traders exit entirely or hold for a rebound, given the narrow narrative-reality gap (1 point)?
Updated: 09/06/2026, 11:29 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"United States Antimony Reports Progress on Stibnite Hill Mining Campaign"
"United States Antimony says it has transported about 576 tons of stibnite ore at about 10% antimony content from Stibnite Hill, Montana in 2026, running about 42 tons per day"
"United States Antimony surged 8% this morning with no press release, no earnings, and no same-day filing to explain it"
"United States Antimony has a $10-11 target, as the market overreacts to weak antimony prices and trailing revenue"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 4D 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
Jesse Livermore — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some seeing it as a resilient, cyclically positioned opportunity while others dismiss it as volatile or overvalued. The highest-scoring approaches—Bagehot’s liquidity focus and Nelson’s cycle analysis—highlight its defensive strength and favorable market positioning, suggesting it could weather downturns or benefit from a rebound. Conversely, Fisher and Veblen’s low scores flag a lack of quality-driven growth or unsustainable speculative behavior, while Livermore’s extreme caution underscores a clear downtrend conflict. The middle ground, from Marks (cycle) and Graham to Lynch and Bogle, reveals mixed signals: some see reasonable risk/reward, while others question whether the price already embeds all available upside or lacks the durability for long-term holding.
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 97
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 (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 87
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 86
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)
🟢 73
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
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)
🟢 70
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 60
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 58
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 57
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 56
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 39
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 13
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 289 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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 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.
Gross Margin
25.2%
Operating Margin
-21.5%
Net Margin
-11.1%
EBITDA Margin
-18.6%
ROE
-3.1%
ROA
-2.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.04
Cash
$30.49M
Total Debt
$195.43K
Current Ratio
5.38
Debt/Equity
0.00
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.17
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$7.49
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-279.7%
🔴 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% | $-46.87M | $-43.00M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-55.96M | $-47.10M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-63.65M | $-49.15M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-68.82M | $-48.76M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-70.54M | $-45.85M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-37.50M
Terminal Value
$-1.11B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-722.98M
Enterprise Value
$-956.84M
Net Debt
$-30.30M
Equity Value
$-926.54M
*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
$1.14
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.14
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 10 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 30.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
CNW Group · 8.9.2026
NYSE · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 1.9.2026
Fintel · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 25.8.2026
MT Newswires · 25.8.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 25.8.2026
Benzinga · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 39/100, 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.
UAMY currently scores 39/100 (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, UAMY's estimated fair value is -$7.49, which is 279.7% below the current price of $4.17. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UAMY's technical score is 13/100, 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): 162.8%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Debt/equity: 0.00.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$7.49 vs. price $4.17 (-279.7%); Operating margin: -21.5% (negative); Net margin: -11.1% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for UAMY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 10 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bardswich Lloyd | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 932,881 | +20,000 | $4.64 |
| Carrabba Joseph A | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 198,401 | +21,300 | $4.72 |
| Bardswich Lloyd | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 20,000 | +20,000 | $4.64 |
| Carrabba Joseph A | Open Market Purchase | 1.9.2026 | 21,300 | +21,300 | $4.72 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 878,092 | +1,400 | $5.04 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Open Market Purchase | 31.8.2026 | 1,400 | +1,400 | $5.04 |
| EVANS GARY C | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 2,590,028 | +20,000 | $4.92 |
| EVANS GARY C | Open Market Purchase | 28.8.2026 | 20,000 | +20,000 | $4.92 |
| Marinelli Jon R | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $7.45 |
| Marinelli Jon R | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 12,500 | +12,500 | $7.45 |
| ISAAK RICHARD R | Disposition to the Company | 2.6.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $9.75 |
| ISAAK RICHARD R | Disposition to the Company | 2.6.2026 | 344,376 | -100,000 | $9.75 |
| Bardswich Lloyd | Disposition to the Company | 2.4.2026 | 59,872 | -59,872 | $8.98 |
| Bardswich Lloyd | Disposition to the Company | 2.4.2026 | 877,483 | -59,872 | $8.98 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 3,000 | -3,000 | $8.26 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | $8.20 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $8.22 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 9,600 | -9,600 | $8.24 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 8,400 | -8,400 | $8.23 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 867,754 | -5,000 | $8.20 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 866,754 | -1,000 | $8.22 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 858,354 | -8,400 | $8.23 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 848,754 | -9,600 | $8.24 |
| Aguirre Blaise A. | Disposition to the Company | 31.3.2026 | 845,754 | -3,000 | $8.26 |
| Bardswich Lloyd | Disposition to the Company | 27.3.2026 | 36,181 | -36,181 | $9.05 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
33,504,112 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 33,318,835 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
44.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 45.6% 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