NXTNasdaqGSbullOPERATING CO.judged on execution & valuationStabilizing
Nextpower Inc. ·
$104.62
▲+1.71 (+1.66%)
Aug 11, 2026 · 11:45 AM ET
Mkt cap$14.29B
P/E · fwd27.1 · 18.1
Div yieldNone
Beta 1y2.56
Volume575.1K0.18× avg
52-wk range -35.9%53163
The five reads
At a glance the decision-relevant reads, first
GLOBAL TAPE
Overseas lean0.00%
MéxicoNXT1*0.00%⏱
ZurichNXT0.00%⏱
Track record · free & ungated
We grade our price-band calls in public
Each forward price band is logged the day it's set and scored when it resolves — misses included. 5 bands have resolved so far — not yet enough for a hit-rate that would mean anything, so none is shown. This builds in the open, not behind the paywall.
15
bands logged
5
resolved so far
Building
status
The calibration ledger stays free, always — a track record can't sit behind a paywall.
Price action
Price & quote
Live quote refreshed every 15 minutes against the full daily snapshot.
The readHolding bidfact
Where the price sits inside today's range and its 52-week range, plus how it's performed over time. This is the raw quote — the same number everywhere, just faster.
◆ Golden cross◇ Descending channel50-day sits above the 200-day — bullish long-term structure.
Drag or arrow-key the chart for daily OHLCV · 126 sessions through Aug 10, 2026 · prev close $102.91 (dashed) · live $104.62 hollow — not yet a settled bar
Open●
$104.72
Prev close●
$102.91
Volume●
575.1K
avg 3.28M
Rel. volume◐
0.18×
below normal
Market cap●
$14.29B
Shares out●
136.54M
float 147.48M
Day range
$103.94$106.43
52-week range ◐
$52.61$163.13
-35.9% from high+98.9% above low
The QTick signal
QTick proprietary signal
A transparent point tally — bull evidence minus bear evidence — read over ~30 days. Faster factors time the swing; slower ones (quality, 13F, forensics) weigh in as longer-horizon context. A model-based prior, not advice.
~30-day swing read · graded vs S&Puncalibrated prior · track record buildingstrength is the tally magnitude, not a probability
Price-factor lean — not shown at this market cap (these factors carry no validated edge above small-cap).
Where this is validated: survivorship-free factor study (micro/small caps only), |t|>3.2. Cohort-relative ranking, not a price forecast or buy/sell advice. Calibration tracked live.
+4
net · leaning
3 bull / 2 bear factors
Factor breakdown 8 factors · signed points sum to net +4●
Analyst moves90d+3 pts
1 analyst upgrade(s) in 90d
Earnings4 quarters+3 pts
latest EPS beat by 15%
Insider flow120d-1 pts
net insider selling ($20,284,602 across 13 sell(s)) in 120d
Estimate revisionsWeeks—
Sentiment1–30d+1 pts
7d sentiment elevated (100/100)
Longer-horizon context weighs the read · not a 30-day timing call
Institutional (13F)Latest 13F—
1 institutional holder(s) added/opened last quarter (demoted — validated negative IC, not scored (QUANT_SIGNAL.md))
Quality / valueTTM-2 pts
weak Piotroski F-score (3/8)
Filing forensicsLatest FY—
Risk flagsDaily—
Net tally
+4
7 bull − 3 bear
Factors agreeing
3↑ 2↓
of 9 tracked
Read strength
leaning
30d horizon
Strongest factor
Analyst moves
+3 pts
Model
QTick Engine
NXT track record
Building
5 of 15 resolved
Forensic flags filing red flags · backtested edge where shown●
Revenue-timing languagerevenue-recognition timing language worth watching
Territory — competitor / supplier graph ●
FSLRPeer+0.6%
ENPHPeer+2.1%
SEDGPeer+1.5%
RUNPeer+2.1%
SMTGFPeer0.0%
Where the reads agree
Cross-category read
A decorrelated view across the categories already scored elsewhere on this page — where they agree, where they conflict, and how lopsided the split is. Not a new signal, a different angle on ones that already exist.
Category reads n=6 categories voting
Streetleans up
Eventleans up
Positioningleans down
Qualityleans down
Trendleans down
Riskleans up n=5
3 lean up, 3 lean down — modal read: bear.
Where they conflict
Street leans up while Trend leans down.
Event leans up while Trend leans down.
Street leans up while Quality leans down.
3 of 6 weighted reads lean the other way — minority weight share 41%.
Named patterns
Tape is deteriorating with risk flags lit.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Quality, positioning and the street agree.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Cheap, but low-quality and credit-stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Tape turning up while fundamentals/credit are still stressed.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Crowded ownership and street love at a rich valuation.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
High quality, solvent and trending.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Trend, crowded short positioning and option fuel.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
Trend that is heavily rate/macro-driven.partial descriptive — a pattern in the current reads, not a validated signal
↳ In detail
A pattern, not a validated signal
This regroups categories the page already scores elsewhere into one cross-category view — it does not add a new tally. Descriptive only — a decorrelated read of where the evidence agrees and conflicts, not a forecast and not advice. Patterns are condition lists, not outcome predictions, and are not yet validated to the proof bar.
+4 net
leaning
3 bull / 2 bear factors
Red-Flag X-Ray
Accounting quality · red-flag scan
One integrity score (0–100) from a set of accounting checks that look for red flags. Higher is safer — and we show the checks it passed, not just the ones it failed.
How we test · 7 forensic testsA clear result ships as openly as a flag — and the tests that don't fire are published in full. No survivorship bias.
Share dilution / SBC creepFires when shares outstanding rise materially or stock-based comp outpaces buybacks.
Distress (Altman-Z, negative equity)Fires on balance-sheet fragility. For banks we substitute regulatory capital (CET1).
Margin trajectoryFires on multi-quarter gross / operating margin erosion.
Going-concern languageNLP scan of filings for material-doubt or going-concern wording.
Filing timelinessFires on late / NT (non-timely) filings and restatements.
Insider selling into strengthFires on discretionary insider sells during price strength; 10b5-1 plans down-weighted.
Analyst-downgrade momentumFires on clusters of net downgrades and target cuts.
Odds & pullback risk
Setup & odds
Which way the next move is more likely to go — and how overstretched the price looks right now.
The readSkews upsidewhere it sitsuncalibrated prior · not a forecast
How the likely upside compares with the downside, and how stretched the price is — odds, not timing.
Upside vs downside · 12m ◐
Upside 53.7%46.1% Downside
Skew favours upside · base rate 50/50
Historically, names tripping 0 validated red flags finished lower 12 months later in 46% of cases (n=20,692) — a survivor-biased floor, not a forecast. · n=20,692
Expected move · 1wk◐±9.7% ≈ $10.15
Upside target◐$104.43 -0.2% · level, not a call
Invalidation / stop◐$101.57 -2.9% · level, not a call
Reward : risk◐-0.1 : 1
BullClose above $104 opens continuation.
BaseChop between stop and target into the next catalyst.
BearA break of $102 invalidates the setup.
Pullback risk · experimental ◐
LowElevatedHigh
Historically, large names in this tape state saw a ≥10% pullback within 63 trading days in 74% of cases (n=222).
1.17×the segment norm — 74% saw a ≥10% pullback within 63dn=222 · observational
Resolved up vs down · 63d◐58% up · 42% down same historical group as the pullback read · 222 cases · flat outcomes count on neither side — a historical rate, not a call
Conditioned on◐bottoming · ANY vol · ANY momentum the past setups matched against this one
1.17× the large unconditional rate
tape state: bottoming
↳ In detail
How to read the odds
This is a historical rate, and an experimental one: across 25 years, stocks in the same state — same segment, same price phase, same volatility, same momentum — pulled back this often. The record is built from today's list of companies, so names that delisted along the way are missing and each stock's current segment is projected backward; the rates lean toward survivors until that rebuild lands. Compare the multiple against the segment rather than the bare percentage — recent years run higher than the full 25-year record. None of it predicts timing.
The structure under the price ●
Support band●$94.22 – $102.40 -2.1% from spot · level, not a call
s1●$101.57 basis
pivot low●$98.77 basis
pivot low●$97.46 basis
~68%of bands like this held 21 days after a touch — about the same as any comparable support level. Structure, not a prediction.n=40,800 · observational
Bottom confirmation●5 of 6 signs in find-bottom score 89/100 — pinned to 0 until the checklist clears
Capitulation flush, then quiet●in
Selling volume dried up●in
A higher low printed●in
Back above the 20-day line●in
Momentum diverging up●not yet
Heaviest volume on an up day●in
85%of confirmed bottoming reads still saw a ≥10% drawdown inside the next quarter (25-year study) — confirmation marks a turn forming, not safety.n=1,203 · observational
Trend & technical structure
Trend & technicals
The price chart's vital signs, in plain English. Expand any row for what it actually means for you.
The readUptrend intactwhere it sitsmoving-average posture · fact
Moving averages describe the direction; RSI and the bands describe how stretched the move is. Neither predicts the next one.
Average prices (the trend)
Price vs 200-day●-4.3%
Momentum, bands & levels
↳ In detail
The simple version
When price sits aboveits averages with momentum rising, the trend is healthy. When RSI is near the extremes or the price looks "stretched," the move is overdone and often takes a breather. Think of these as a weather report — conditions, not instructions.
Pattern outcomes · derived analysis
Do these patterns even work?
Derived · what patterns actually did
Every charting site detects the pattern. We publish what happened next — the forward win-rate and sample size at each horizon, including the famous patterns that historically meant nothing.
The readForward win-rates, with sample sizewhere it sits
How often each chart pattern was actually followed by a gain, and how many past cases that's based on — including famous ones that didn't work.
Each bar is the win-rate — how often the price was higher that many days after the pattern appeared. The line marks 50%, a coin flip: green beats it, red is worse than chance. Every bar is a platform-wide cohort base rateacross every stock that has shown this pattern (cohort record, not this ticker's own history alone).
Pattern10-day21-day63-day
DowntrendBelow a coin flip
forward win-rate46.9%n=1,231,607
forward win-rate47.2%n=577,208
forward win-rate47.4%n=182,081
slope -0.29 over 40 bars
Snapshot as of 2026-08-11
↳ In detail
Why we show you the losers
Famous reversal signals like a bullish engulfing have historically closed higher less than half the time at short horizons — below a coin flip. We publish the win-rate and the sample size on every cohort, so a 42-case base rate never masquerades as an 8,500-case one. Objective base rates, not forecasts.
Momentum & performance
Momentum / performance
Trailing returns and relative strength versus the benchmark.
The readLaggardwhere it sitsRS percentile vs market
How the stock has returned, and whether it's beating the market. A strong run shows recent leadership — leadership reverses without warning.
Trailing returns
1-month◐+3.3%
3-month◐-18.5%
6-month◐-15.6%
Year-to-date◐+10.9%
1-year◐+83.1%
12-1 momentum◐+100.1%
Relative strength vs S&P 500
22.4
RS-rank percentile vs market
laggingleading
Relative strength line (β-adj)◐-23.34
↳ In detail
What relative strength tells you
A rank of 22.4 means NXT has outpaced 22.4% of the market over the past year. That is what it has done, not a promise about what comes next — leadership can reverse without warning.
Risk profile
Risk
Volatility and sensitivity, regressed against SPY from adjusted bars — then the landmine check: what could actually go wrong here.
The readElevated drawdown riskwhere it sitsvs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational
Beta is how much it moves with the market; volatility and the worst drop show how rough the ride has been. Historical context, not a position-size rule.
17.6%6-month large-drawdown risk vs 9.3% for its segment
Elevated drawdown riskNames like this hit a large drawdown within 6 months at 1.9× the rate of the ADV-Q5 mega segment — observational, never a sell.
Beta · 1-year◐
2.56
more sensitive than market
Beta · 3-year◐
1.38
Realized vol · 30d◐
67.5%
annualized
Max drawdown · 1y●
-42.5%
The drawdown read · 6-month, segment-graded
Where it sits1.9×
LowHigh
vs the ADV-Q5 mega segment base rate · observational
17.6%6-month large-drawdown risk, vs 9.3% for its segment
Max drawdown, trailing year●-0.43 driver
Distance from 52-week high●-0.37 driver
Parkinson range volatility●0.61 driver
Log price (level)●4.63 driver
Observational 6-month large-drawdown risk ranking — not a forecast, not alpha. Historical distress rate for this ADV-Q5 mega segment: 9.3%. This name reads 1.9× that base rate.
Tape state & tail · nightly, adjusted bars
bottoming1/100
SettledKnifing
State: bottoming — A basing/reversal pattern is printing: capitulation volume has dried and a higher low is in (confirmation 80%).
−13.1%a 1-in-200 day for this name — 1.0× what a normal curve expects
↳ In detail
Reading risk
A beta of 2.56 means that, historically, a 1% move in the S&P has come with a ~2.56% move here. Realized vol ran 68% and the largest drawdown observed in the trailing year was 43% — both are what happened, not a bound on what can. The drawdown band above is observational — a risk sort against names of the same segment, blind to balance-sheet failures that never showed in the price.
Failure modes
Coverage
Data not available — failure modes are routed per company type, and only the bank and crypto-treasury rulebooks are validated so far (this name routes as growth)
Macro sensitivity · derived analysis
How rates push this name
Derived · rates & regime
The 10-year yield is public. Its measured pull on this specific stock — and how it trades around the macro calendar — is the derived layer.
The readFalls with rateswhere it sitshow it moved when rates moved · extremes trimmed
How much this stock actually moves when interest rates move, and how it behaves around big economic releases.
Sensitivity to 10Y yield ●
Per +1% in the 10Y yield+12.2%
−120+12
Rates are a Falls with rates for this name
Observations●498 rolling window
Fit · r²●n/a
Measured across 498 daily moves against the 10-year Treasury yield (FRED DGS10). Where the company-level link is weak or the sample is short, we fall back to the sector average rather than print a number we don't trust.
Behaviour around the macro calendar ●
CPI · vs a typical dayn=00.0×
FOMC · vs a typical dayn=00.0×
NFP · vs a typical dayn=00.0×
PCE · vs a typical dayn=00.0×
× = how much more this stock moves on each release day vs a normal day. Amber = outsized (≥1.4×). Context, not a directional call.
Volatility regime ◔
The volatility engine runs on market-wide risk channels, not on individual names, so there is no 1-year volatility percentile for this symbol. The realized-volatility and drawdown reads in the risk section are the per-name measures.
Valuation
Valuation
Is the stock cheap or expensive? Each multiple is graded and explained in plain English.
The readLeans expensivewhere it sitsagainst its own 5-year range where we have it · standard bands otherwise
Price against earnings, sales, book value and cash flow. We mark the measures that don't apply rather than fake them.
What you pay for earnings
P/E (trailing)●Price ÷ last 12 months of profit; graded vs own 5y history when covered27.1×Fair
Forward P/E●Price ÷ next year's expected profit18.1×Fair
PEG ratio◐Valuation set against expected growth — lower can look cheaper, but one cutoff is not a verdict1.15Fair
Earnings yield◔Profit as a % of price, like a bond yield3.69%Fair
Earnings yield − risk-free●Earnings yield minus the government-bond yield at the same date-0.66%Spread
Dividend yield●Annual indicated cash dividend as a % of price0.00%Income
What you pay for the business
Price / Sales●Price ÷ annual revenue; graded vs own 5y history when covered4.5×Rich
Price / Book◔Price ÷ net assets on the books6.90×Rich
EV / EBITDA◔Whole-company value ÷ operating cash earningsn/an/a
EV / FCF◔Whole-company value ÷ positive free cash flown/an/a
FCF yield◔Free cash flow as a % of market value3.19%Fair
P/E vs own 5y●Five-year median 25.4×54th pctFair
P/S vs own 5y●Five-year median 3.1×84th pctRich
EV/EBITDA and P/FCF need positive operating cash earnings to mean anything (and don't apply to banks, where leverage is the product) — so we mark them n/a rather than print a misleading number.
Peers today territory performance, for valuation context
FSLRPeer+0.6%
ENPHPeer+2.1%
SEDGPeer+1.5%
RUNPeer+2.1%
SMTGFPeer0.0%
Fundamentals & quality
Fundamentals / quality
How good is the underlying business? Scale, profitability and balance-sheet strength, graded.
The readPartial fundamentals readwhere it sitsreturn on capital vs its estimated cost of funding
Scale, profitability and balance sheet, with industrial return on capital compared directly with its estimated funding cost.
Scale & growth
Revenue · TTM◔Total sales over the last 12 months$3.56BScale
EPS · TTM◔Profit earned per share$3.83Profit
Net margin◔Cents of profit kept per $1 of sales16.5%OK
Revenue growth◔Sales vs a year ago+20.3%Strong
EPS growth◔Profit-per-share vs a year ago—n/a
Margin trajectory◔Are profit margins widening or shrinking?n/an/a
Returns & balance sheet
ROE◔Profit generated on shareholders' equity25.1%Strong
ROIC●After-tax operating profit earned on the capital the business usesn/an/a
WACC●Estimated blended cost of debt and equity15.0%Hurdle
ROIC − WACC●Return on capital above or below its funding costn/an/a
Incremental ROIC · ~3y●What the last three years of new investment has actually earnedn/an/a
Gross / Op margin◔Profitability before & after operating costs33% / 20%OK
Free cash flow◔Cash left after running & investing$513.63MStrong
Cash self-funding◔Self-funding on trailing free cash flow, or months of cash left at the current burnSelf-fundingCash
Debt / Equity◔Gross borrowings vs equity — negative book equity is not gradeablen/an/a
Current ratio◔Can it cover near-term bills? Over 1.5 is healthy2.45Strong
Total assets · YoY◔Balance-sheet growth — a fact, not a signal · grew faster than 79% of the measured cross-section · as of 2026-08-09+27.6%Fact
Last filed 2026-08-11
Inventory ledger
The stockroom
Data not available.
Segments & geography
Where the revenue lives
Data not available.
Credit & safety · derived analysis
Distance from insolvency
Derived · distance from default
Not the debt total — how far this company's asset value could fall before its debts get hard to cover, and how that distance ranks against its peers.
The readSolventwhere it sitspercentile vs solvency universe
How far the company sits from real financial distress, plus how it ranks against peers — more than a debt total tells you.
99.96%12-month survival read
None of 6,719 historical observations in this bucket went bankrupt within 12 months — the served 0.04% is a conservative statistical floor, never a claimed zero.
measured against past bankruptcies and delistings · tested on later years (AUC 0.90) · a historical rate, not a credit rating
7.39
σ to default
0.04%model-implied probability of default ●
Filing-forensics flags
1/4
SafeGreyDistress
Model-implied, not a credit rating.It estimates how far the company's assets would have to fall before it couldn't cover its debts, using a standard model (Merton). Higher is safer. (risk-free rate n/a, one-year horizon, asset volatility from —)
Structural snapshot as of 2026-08-11
Distance-to-default band ●
distress · 0cautionsafe8σ+
Debt-service capacity
Interest coverage●n/a operating income / absolute interest expense
Long-term debt / assets●n/a as filed; distinct from Merton D/V
↳ In detail
How to read these two ratios
The credit engine uses the same stored thresholds shown here: coverage at or below 1× cannot cover interest, while 8× or more is its comfortable band; long-term debt at 10% of assets or less is its light band, while 60% or more is its heavy band. Missing XBRL tags stay n/a.
Altman solvency ●
Altman Z-Score●7.4 Safe
↳ In detail
Why a percentile, not a number
The absolute Z-Score is shown whenever its filing inputs exist. The cross-sectional percentile is a separate field and stays n/a until a current universe rank is on file.
Forensic accounting ●
1Validated forensic-accounting flag fired. Individual flag details are not carried by this endpoint.
Dilution radar · derived analysis
Are your shares being diluted?
Derived · ownership erosion
Raw share count is everywhere. The consequence — how fast the count is growing and where that ranks against peers — is the read that matters.
The read—where it sitsdilution percentile vs peers
How fast the share count is changing versus peers, with stock compensation, issuance and repurchases shown separately when covered.
5-year share-count CAGR ●
The CAGR needs annual filings roughly five years apart that both carry a share count. This name's filing history on file does not span that window, so no rate is published — the buyback and stock-comp rows below are measured independently and still hold.
Most-dilutive percentile vs peers
LeastMedianMost
0percentile100
Peer percentile●97th above median
Stock comp / revenue◔4.0% latest fiscal year
Stock comp / OCF◔operating cash flow29.7% latest fiscal year
Gross buyback yield●0.00% TTM repurchases / market value
Net buyback yield●0.00% TTM repurchases minus issuance / market value
Indexing needs an unbroken run of annual share counts across the same five-year window the CAGR uses. Where a year is missing — or the reported counts switch share class mid-series — the chart is withheld rather than drawn across the gap.
Analyst & estimates
Analyst & estimates
Consensus, price targets, forward estimates, and the company's recent results versus consensus.
The read—where it sitswhere Wall Street sits · not QTick
Targets matter less than which way estimates are heading and how often the company beats them.
The consensus EPS level, the share of analysts raising, and the realised beat-rate all come from the same estimate capture, which does not cover this name. The rating, target band and street moves above are from a separate source and are current.
EPS surprise history ●
No reported-vs-estimate pairs on file for this name
Recent rating changes ●
Street moves · last 90 days ◔
•target $149GLJ Researchfirm credibility 31/10005 Aug
↓target $111Mizuhofirm credibility 49/10004 Aug
↓target $132Citigroupfirm credibility 43/10003 Aug
The street's consensus-surprise habit — whether estimates run conservative or aggressive against what the company reports, not management's own guidance — the beat streak graded against names with the same profile, and what the tape does on good news.
The readSerial beaterwhere it sitsvalidated base rates · graded out-of-time
Whether the street sandbags this name, how often a beat streak like this persists (with its sample size), and what the tape does with good news.
80%of names with this beat profile beat againn=33,684 · observational
Consensus habit · trailing 8 quarters
Consensus-surprise habit●not management guidanceconsensus runs low for this name — it routinely clears the bar n=8
Trailing beat rate●100% beat 7–8 of the last 8 · n=8
80%of names that beat 7–8 of the last 8 went on to beat again — 1.28× the segment average (cohort record since 2000, not this stock alone)n=33,684 · observational
Implied vs realized move●— insufficient options history
↳ In detail
How to read the habit
This is a historical rate: among companies with the same recent beat record, that share beat again. It was checked on later periods than the ones it learned from, and against the plain long-run average. It describes the group, not this specific report.
Ownership & positioning
Ownership
Who holds it, how options lean, and the most recent insider, congressional and 13F transactions.
The readFunds reducingwhere it sitspositioning band · not a vote
Who owns it and what insiders and big funds are doing. Steady buying reads positive; heavy selling reads cautious.
Holders
Institutional●108.7%
Insider●0.7%
Institutional flow●Funds reducing
Fund concentration●—
Activist stake●None on file
Insider & short
Insider 90d net●—
10b5-1 vs discretionary◔scheduledMostly programmatic
Short interest · %float◔6.5%
Short interest · 30d Δ◔—
Options positioning
Put/call · OI●1.15
Put/call · volume●0.49
Implied move●next exp.±12.4%
IV skew (25Δ)●+36.7% put-skewed
↳ In detail
Reading the positioning
Institutions have begun trimming. A put/call of 1.15 and put-skewed IV — leaning defensive.
SHUGAR DANIEL SDirector, Chief Executive OfficerInsiderSell023 Jun
SHUGAR DANIEL SDirector, Chief Executive OfficerInsiderSell390000023 Jun
13F filers · last quarter ●
Bridgewater Associates (Ray Dalio)Added+0.3M sh · $30M
Institutional flow · derived analysis
Conviction weighting, not a transaction list
Derived · who's actually buying
Insider buys are weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several bought at once, alongside how fast big funds moved in or out quarter to quarter.
The readContinuing holders trimmingwhere it sitscontinuing holders only — excludes new and exited funds
Insider buys, weighted by how senior the buyer is and whether several buy at once — plus how fast big funds are moving in or out.
How strong the insider buying is ●
Clustered exec buys · n/an/a / 18.44
018.44
Intensity index — explicitly not a probability
Distinct exec buyers
n/a
Buy clusters · last 90d
90d agotoday
Fund holders · quarter on quarter ●
+68new fundsexited−169
Net registered funds -101 this quarter
Continuing holders●Trimming on balance funds that held through both quarters
↳ In detail
Reading the flow
No clustered executive buying this window. Among funds that held the name through both quarters, more trimmed than added. Separately, the registered-holder count moved -101 quarter-over-quarter (68 new, 169 exited). The two count different populations, so they can point opposite ways. Conviction is intensity, not a forecast.
Options microstructure
Options microstructure
Computed over the stored full chain — where dealer hedging concentrates. Prices here are the chain snapshot's own, not the header quote.
The readHedging leans amplifyingwhere it sitswhere options exposure sits
The busiest option strikes are where hedging is concentrated, which can slow or sharpen a move nearby. Context — not support and resistance.
Open-interest by strike · gamma walls ◐
Puts OI (k)Calls OI (k)
106
135
1093
813
130
1619WALL
84
125
1124
1227
120
702
227
115
497
697
110
233
198
105
245
334
100
467
1496
95
108
WALL2688
90
90
314
85
7
2240
80
29
1328
75
16
889
70
12
338
65
4
312
60
13
chain spot $96.89 max pain $120 (+23.9%)
Dealer regime & expected move
Gamma exposure (GEX)
Negative
short
Max pain●$120.00 (+23.9%)
Put/call · OI●1.15
Call wall◐$130.00 resistance
Put wall◐$90.00 support
Expected move · session◐±4.7%
Expected move · week◐±10.5%
No nearby clusterPut-heavyShort gamma
↳ In detail
Reading the options chain
The book is skewed to puts — about 13.3K contracts of put open interest versus 6.3K calls across the strikes nearest spot (chain-wide P/C 1.15). That's heavy downside hedging: $90 is the put-OI wall — open-interest concentration that tends to act as support. Dealers are short gamma, so their hedging amplifies moves: max pain matters less here, and a push through the $130 / $90 walls can accelerate rather than fade. The chain is pricing about ±10.5% (≈ $10.19) over the coming week.
observational · not advice
Gamma map · derived analysis
Where dealer hedging concentrates
Derived · dealer hedging · marquee
Open interest is free everywhere. What it does — whether dealer hedging dampens or amplifies a 1% move, and the strikes where that hedging concentrates — is the derived read.
The readHedging may sharpen moveswhere it sitswhere dealer hedging sits
Whether dealer hedging leans toward steadying the price or sharpening the next move, and the strikes where that hedging is concentrated.
Support / resistance rails ◐
call wall · resistance$130
spot$96.89
put wall · support$90
Dealer regime ◐
Short gamma — hedging can sharpen moves
Net dealer gamma◐−$1.28M per 1% move
ATM implied vol◐0.7%
Expected move · 1d◐±4.7%
Expected move · 1w◐±10.5%
OTM IV skew (25Δ)◐+36.7% put-skewed
↳ In detail
Reading the gamma map
Dealers are short gamma, so their hedging amplifies moves — a push through $130.00 or $90.00 tends to accelerate, not fade. Net gamma of −$1.28M is the dollar hedging effect per 1% move — the consequence a raw chain never tells you.
NXT is tracking the group (peer avg +1.26% today) — this is a sector move, not a single-name one.
Supply map how the territory wires together●
customer
Customer momentum
The customer chain
Data not available.
News & market context
The Story · news & social
Coverage published around the move, with the crowd's mood shown next to each.
The readCrowd mixedfactread as contrarian context
What moved the stock, plus how bullish the crowd is — which tends to be loudest right at the turning points.
Latest headlines 0▲ 0▼ of 48●
News
NXT was little changed −0.34% since the last close, amid recent coverage: “NXT (NXT) insider Daniel S. Shugar plans sale of 67,636 Class A shares - stocktitan.net” (stocktitan.net).
Nextpower Inc. $NXT Shares Purchased by E. Ohman J or Asset Management AB - MarketBeat
NEWSMarketBeat·8h ago
Neutral
NXT (NXT) insider Daniel S. Shugar plans sale of 67,636 Class A shares - stocktitan.net
NEWSstocktitan.net·Mon
Neutral
Nextpower (NXT) Is Up 13.9% After Raising 2027 Guidance And Affirming Buybacks And M&A Focus - simplywall.st
NEWSsimplywall.st·Mon
Neutral
NXT Stock (NXT) Opinions on electrification trends - Quiver Quantitative
NEWSQuiver Quantitative·Sat
Headline tone ◐
100/100 · 7-day
flat
Polarity of the headlines themselves, scored 0-100 with 50 neutral — a read on the coverage, not on the crowd.
Social sentiment ◐
No Reddit or StockTwits posts on file for this name in the last 7 days.
What this name did from here
Time machine
Each look-back point: the price then, the move to today, and what was going on — earnings, corporate events, news flow.
The readHigher than a year agofact
The price at each look-back point and the move to today, with what was happening at the time — the per-ticker face of the track record.
Look-backs · vs the $102.91 close of 2026-08-10
3 months ago●$125.91 -18.3% to today
6 months ago●$117.94 -12.7% to today
1 year ago●$56.21 +83.1% to today
3 years ago●$40.73 +152.7% to today
history starts 2023-06-01
↳ In detail
Why we show the rear-view mirror
Every number on this page gets graded by what happens next. The time machine is the same idea pointed backwards: the state of this name at each past date and the move that followed, for any symbol — not a curated highlight reel.
Risk case · derived analysis
The risk case
The case against
What can break: how hard this name has fallen before, a sensible position cap, whether it behaves like a lottery ticket, how much cash it has left, how it drifts after earnings, whether the dividend holds, and what changed in the filings — plus a crowding read when its three inputs agree.
The readCoverage incompletewhere it sitsan experimental model estimate · the history-based reads below are graded separately
The case against the stock: how hard it has fallen before, how much cash it has left, how it behaves after earnings, whether the dividend holds, what changed in the filings, and how crowded the trade is.
Avoid score · v2.1 isotonic model · experimental
The nightly batch has not scored this name yet — the model needs universe-wide ranking features that are not computed on demand.
Terminal fate · the cohort's ledger
Of 1242 large names tracked 2016-2026, 0.2% were delisted for cause within 24 months and 3.0% were acquired — historical frequencies for the cohort, not a forecast for this name.
Each row is what happened to every tracked name in this size cohort over that window — delisted for cause, acquired, or still listed — with the band around each rate. These are the cohort's historical frequencies, not probabilities for this name, and the acquisition arm is never an acquisition forecast.
Deep-drawdown recovery record
62.3%of large names 30% or more below their prior high reclaimed it within 3 years, counting the delisted as never-recovered — an upper bound, since still-open episodes are excludedn=2,016 · observational
Names this size that fell 30% took a median 265 trading days to reclaim their prior high — and only 62.3% did within 3 years once the delisted are counted (a survivor-only screen would claim 66.3%).
This name's drawdown●-34.2% crossed the −30% bucket · vs the trailing 3y high
Survivor-only view●66.3% the illusion gap is 4.1% — what dropping the delisted flatters the odds by
Median recovery●265 trading days among the names that did recover
No lottery signal — trailing-21d max daily return is within the normal range for its cohort (large).
Cash runway · non-burner
Positive free cash flow — burner runway risk does not apply. Non-burner: catastrophe rate 6.1% (n=297414).
Post-earnings drift · reaction vs sigma
+2.24% spread63-trading-day post-earnings drift, graded by reaction magnitude (bucket: 2-4)
Drift odds at full strength (+2.24% / 63-day spread reference from measured post-earnings drift).
Latest earnings reaction●+13.3% 2026-01-27
Daily sigma (21d)●4.25% baseline volatility used for z-score
Reaction size●2-4 first-day move ÷ its normal daily move
Strength of evidence●3.35 Newey–West t — how consistent the pattern is, not how many cases
↳ In detail
How post-earnings drift works
After an earnings reaction, how far price keeps drifting over the next 63 trading days depends on how big the first move was. A jump more than four times the stock's normal daily move usually spends the effect — the market has already repriced it. Milder reactions historically kept drifting, by about 3.2 percentage points in our sample.
Dividend reliability
No dividend on file — trap / covered classification does not apply.
Filing restatements
No material restatement on file in the trailing 2 years.
Calibration scorecard
Auditable track record
Every rating we publish is fingerprinted, tracked, and resolved in public. Here's how we've actually done.
15
calls logged track record builds as calls resolve (5/8)