The score fell 14 points, mainly due to valuation and price changes. Price fell 0.9%, from $2.25 to $2.23.

Valuation and price changes subtracted 13.7 points. The comparison uses the same available inputs on both dates. Displayed changes are rounded to whole points.

Historical cheapness: current PE is 39.6× versus the full-history median of 4.4× shown in the valuation table, producing 5.1/100. Positive weekly observations receive equal weight; lower past EPS alone does not disqualify them.

Outlook-adjusted valuation: 5.1/100. The model applies a -11.7% 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 9× (18-month half-life). The favorable scenario uses 34.2× PE and $0.1 projected EPS, informed by growth, margins and earnings-quality checks. This is a model scenario, not an analyst target. A return to the full-history median is not assumed.

Business trends are mixed. Over the past year: limited comparable growth data. The business score is 50/100. Growth, margins and cash generation drive the score. Missing or older data receives less weight.

The earnings calculation and the displayed scenario are different.

The earnings case uses $0.05 of EPS and a 34.2× PE, suggesting about $1.83 before the minimum is applied. Valuation history and outlook inform the PE.

The model applies a 15% minimum upside scenario, so the card shows +15%, or about $2.55. That adjusted price does not come from the EPS × PE calculation above.

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

Weaker than expected earnings could put pressure on the share price.

Our downside case uses $0.04 of EPS and a 33.2× PE, suggesting a share price of about $1.38 — 38% below today’s price. Valuation history and outlook inform the PE.

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