The score fell 2 points, mainly due to valuation and price changes. Price rose 1.5%, from $15.38 to $15.61. Reported EPS was unchanged, so the higher price reduced valuation support.

Valuation and price changes subtracted 1.5 points. The comparison uses the same available inputs on both dates. Displayed changes are rounded to whole points.

Historical cheapness: current PE is 6.8× versus the full-history median of 6.4× shown in the valuation table, producing 48.2/100. Positive weekly observations receive equal weight; lower past EPS alone does not disqualify them.

Outlook-adjusted valuation: 45.8/100. The model applies a 1.5% earnings-growth assumption and a 10% annual return hurdle, with positive credit limited by evidence coverage and confidence.

Forward price scenarios use recent PE history separately. Recent history has a separately weighted median of 6.5× (18-month half-life). A reliable earnings-based price target is unavailable. A return to the full-history median is not assumed.

Business trends are mixed. Over the past year: revenue +75.4%, earnings -52.8%. Free cash flow is -153.1% of revenue. The business score is 45.9/100. Growth, margins and cash generation drive the score. Missing or older data receives less weight.

Business trends and outlook support upside. Price history provides the reference because earnings are difficult to compare.

The calculation starts with the stock’s typical weekly price movements, adjusted for business performance and outlook. Unusually large jumps have less influence. The result is 25.9% upside, or about $19.65.

This is a scenario based on our model, not a forecast or probability.

The 36.6% downside is driven by operating stress: the model assumes earnings fall 21.8% and the PE falls 18.9%. That gives $1.80 per share at a 5.5× PE, or about $9.90. Price swings alone suggest 36.2% downside.

This is a scenario based on our model, not a forecast or probability.