Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$1.23
▲ $0.06 (+5.1%)
Market data updated: 09/28 03:49 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/28/2026
News analyzed: 09/28/2026
Market Cap
$100.99M
Day Range
$1.16 - $1.25
52-Week Range
$0.54 - $7.75
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
Support
$0.70
Resistance
$1.34
UPXI is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
-76.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 18/33 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
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): 58.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$4.77 vs. price $1.23 (-487.9%)
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
54
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
40
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
90
Risk
46
Sentiment
32
Fundamental
46
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 does not provide explicit details about Upexi, Inc., as none of the provided English-language headlines or summaries mention the company directly. The sources focus instead on broader crypto and financial sector trends, such as Bitcoin’s rise, stablecoin infrastructure launches, and industry restructuring. Without specific Upexi-related news, no summary can be offered.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Upexi, Inc.. News trend score: 32. Reason: 7 of the last 17 articles are negative, versus 4 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
44
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
23
Psychology
51
Fundamentals
46
Technical
90
Valuation
38
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.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+48%
Market Narrative
59
Fundamental Reality
23
Narrative Gap
+36
🔀 Weak-Conviction Rally
Price is moving, but not accompanied by a matching rise in news attention/sentiment.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
UPXI’s market behavior suggests traders are prioritizing short-term momentum (+21.6% ROC) over fundamentals, with overconfidence (52) dominating. The narrative gap (+35) and confirmation bias (46) imply investors cherry-pick positive signals while ignoring revenue weakness (-0.4%). Herding is muted, as peers underperformed, but FOMO (48) and euphoria (24) indicate speculative energy. The key question: will momentum sustain despite the disconnect between price gains and earnings growth?
Updated: 09/07/2026, 05:54 PM
What could change this?
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 73/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 15/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits the historical methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: Benjamin Graham’s models overwhelmingly favor it as a high-conviction opportunity, while nearly every other approach—from Fisher’s strict quality standards to the efficient-market skeptics—either dismisses it outright or warns of hidden risks. Graham’s Enterprising Investor framework, scoring near-perfect, sees deep statistical undervaluation, while his Defensive Investor also finds it attractive, suggesting a robust margin of safety. In contrast, Fisher’s low score (7) and the near-unanimous caution from cycle analysts (Marks, Nelson, Housel) highlight concerns about speculative crowd behavior or overvaluation, even as Veblen’s growth-aligned verdict and Mackay’s crowd-excitement warning create a tension between perceived value and market sentiment. The divergence underscores how Graham’s quantitative focus contrasts sharply with Fisher’s qualitative rigor and the cyclical pessimism of others, leaving little middle ground.
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 84
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 72
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)
🟢 71
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 70
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)
🟡 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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 58
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 54
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 45
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 45
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 22
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)
🔴 15
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (10 bullish · 0 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.
The stock is in a clear uptrend 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
89.5%
Operating Margin
-963.5%
Net Margin
-984.3%
EBITDA Margin
-961.6%
ROE
457.3%
ROA
-136.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.87
Cash
$5.78M
Total Debt
$19.50M
Current Ratio
1.64
Debt/Equity
-0.36
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$1.23
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$4.77
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-487.9%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-3.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -3.2% | $-20.32M | $-18.64M |
| 2 | -1.8% | $-19.95M | $-16.79M |
| 3 | -0.4% | $-19.88M | $-15.35M |
| 4 | 1.1% | $-20.09M | $-14.23M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-20.59M | $-13.38M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-21.00M
Terminal Value
$-324.69M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-211.03M
Enterprise Value
$-289.42M
Net Debt
$13.72M
Equity Value
$-303.14M
*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
-$0.85
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.86
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 4 positive, 6 neutral, 7 negative out of the last 17 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 28.8.2026
Benzinga · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 25.8.2026
Benzinga · 21.8.2026
MT Newswires · 22.6.2026
Upexi, Inc. (UPXI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
UPXI currently scores 54/100 (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, UPXI's estimated fair value is -$4.77, which is 487.9% below the current price of $1.23. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
UPXI's technical score is 90/100, 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): 58.1%; Return on equity (ROE): 457.3% — strong; Debt/equity: -0.36.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$4.77 vs. price $1.23 (-487.9%); Operating margin: -963.5% (negative); Net margin: -984.3% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for UPXI.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 6 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 13 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MARSHALL ALLAN | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 6,046,261 | +2,000,000 | — |
| Norstrud Andrew James | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 1,049,138 | +400,000 | — |
| Salkind Gene | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 318,750 | +100,000 | — |
| Rudick Brian Benjamin | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 1,238,597 | +400,000 | — |
| Dugan Lawrence | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.7.2026 | 216,389 | +100,000 | — |
| MARSHALL ALLAN | Open Market Purchase | 23.12.2025 | 4,046,261 | +50,000 | $1.80 |
| MARSHALL ALLAN | Open Market Purchase | 16.12.2025 | 3,996,261 | +50,000 | $2.07 |
| MARSHALL ALLAN | Open Market Purchase | 15.12.2025 | 3,946,261 | +100,000 | $2.07 |
| Salkind Gene | Open Market Purchase | 20.11.2025 | 218,750 | +50,000 | $2.55 |
| Salkind Gene | Open Market Purchase | 17.11.2025 | 569,470 | +100,000 | $2.65 |
| Salkind Gene | Open Market Purchase | 17.11.2025 | 168,750 | +100,000 | $2.81 |
| Norstrud Andrew James | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.10.2025 | 0 | +240,000 | — |
| MARSHALL ALLAN | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.10.2025 | 3,846,261 | +1,600,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
15,195,028 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 14,776,077 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
43.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 53.7% 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