Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Technology · ·
$1.04
▼ $0.03 (-2.8%)
Market data updated: 09/28 08:45 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/28/2026
News analyzed: 09/28/2026
Market Cap
$6.46M
Day Range
$1.01 - $1.04
52-Week Range
$0.75 - $2.47
Beta
—
Next Earnings
12.11.2026
Support
$1.01
Resistance
$1.60
VS is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
-49.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 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): 3711.3%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Death Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 4 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 4
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
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
12d ago · $1.15
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 13 to 46 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 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
74
Quality
58
Value
55
Momentum
5
Risk
40
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
35
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Versus Systems Inc. has centered on its growth in audience engagement and gamification strategies. The company has been highlighted for partnerships like Winfinite and Filter Fan Cam, which enhance interactive fan participation. Analysts at Zacks have also initiated coverage, noting its advancing approach to turning audiences into active marketing participants through real-world rewards, positioning Versus as a key player in this space.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Versus Systems Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 1 vs. 1 out of the last 6 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
7
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
87
Psychology
81
Fundamentals
35
Technical
5
Valuation
55
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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).
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
43
Fundamental Reality
87
Narrative Gap
-44
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior here is consistent with loss aversion as the dominant psychological force, driven by a prolonged drawdown (-18.9% over three months) and heightened trading volume. The absence of euphoria or overconfidence signals reinforces caution, while the neutral RSI (41) and modest volatility (0.93x ATR) suggest a measured, not panicked, reaction. The narrative gap (-52) further implies a disconnect between market sentiment and perceived reality, likely amplifying defensive positioning. The key question remains whether the elevated volume reflects strategic liquidation or opportunistic buying, given peers’ underperformance.
Updated: 09/07/2026, 05:40 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Company Advances Gamification, Audience Engagement Strategy"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 11D 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
Benjamin Graham — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between value and growth-oriented methodologies, with the highest scores coming from defensive and statistically disciplined investors like Benjamin Graham and Walter Bagehot, who see it as a strong, liquid, and deeply discounted opportunity. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch and Samuel Armstrong Nelson highlight its growth potential and cyclical positioning, suggesting the price hasn’t yet reflected its fundamentals or market momentum. In contrast, more cautious or contrarian voices like Howard Marks (market cycle) and Jack Schwager still find merit in its risk-reward balance, though they temper enthusiasm with awareness of potential overvaluation risks. At the opposite end, methodologies rooted in trend-following (Livermore), volatility aversion (Housel), or market efficiency (Malkiel/Bogle) dismiss it outright, either because it violates core rules or because they see no clear edge over passive investing. The divergence underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in its statistical undervaluation (Graham) or its growth trajectory (Lynch), or if it’s simply too volatile or cyclically risky for some frameworks.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
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: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 99
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 93
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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)
🟢 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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 65
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 57
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)
🟡 41
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 30
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 19
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
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 295 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 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
99.2%
Operating Margin
-99.0%
Net Margin
-82.1%
EBITDA Margin
-99.0%
ROE
-17.6%
ROA
-87.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.37
Cash
$527.39K
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
10.17
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$2.08
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.95
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 1 positive, 4 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 6 articles.
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
NewMediaWire · 15.7.2026
NewMediaWire · 26.6.2026
NewMediaWire · 17.6.2026
Zacks · 10.6.2026
Versus Systems Inc. (VS) 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.
VS 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.
VS's technical score is 5/100, 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): 3711.3%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 76.0%; Net income growth: 55.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin: -99.0% (negative); Net margin: -82.1% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for VS.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,027 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 11,076 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
34.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 27.6% 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