MIND

Technology

MIND Technology, Inc. · Hardware, Equipment & Parts · $80M

UQS Score — Balanced Preset
40.7
Average

MIND Technology, Inc. scores 40.7/100 using the Balanced preset.

34.6
Quality
35%
21.0
Moat
30%
19.3
Growth
20%
82.4
Risk
15%

MIND — Key Takeaways

✅ Strengths

MIND Technology, Inc. shows conservative financial structure with manageable risk
MIND Technology, Inc. shows attractive valuation relative to fundamentals

⚠️ Areas of Concern

MIND Technology, Inc. has below-average profitability metrics
MIND Technology, Inc. has limited growth momentum
MIND Technology, Inc. has limited competitive moat

MIND — Score History

35404550Apr 2Apr 3Apr 4Apr 5Apr 6Apr 7Apr 8
DateUQSQualityMoatGrowthRiskValueChange
Apr 8, 202640.734.621.019.382.470.5+0.6
Apr 7, 202640.133.521.017.882.470.5-0.1
Apr 6, 202640.233.621.018.082.470.50.0
Apr 5, 202640.233.621.018.082.470.5-0.5
Apr 4, 202640.733.621.016.982.475.2-0.4
Apr 3, 202641.134.521.018.082.475.20.0
Apr 2, 202641.134.521.018.082.475.2

MIND — Pillar Breakdown

Quality

34.6/100 (25%)

MIND Technology, Inc. currently shows below-average quality metrics, suggesting challenges with profitability.

Capital Efficiency (ROIC)Weak

How effectively capital is deployed to generate returns.

Return on EquityWeak

Profitability relative to shareholders' equity.

Operating ProfitabilityWeak

Ability to convert revenue into operating profit.

Net ProfitabilityWeak

Bottom-line profit as a share of revenue.

Cash GenerationModerate

Free cash flow relative to market value.

Growth

19.3/100 (20%)

MIND Technology, Inc. faces growth headwinds with declining or stagnant revenue trends.

Recent Revenue TrendWeak

Revenue trajectory over the last twelve months.

Forward Revenue OutlookWeak

Analyst consensus for future revenue growth.

Risk

82.4/100 (15%)

MIND Technology, Inc. carries minimal financial risk with conservative leverage and strong solvency.

Financial LeverageStrong

Debt levels relative to earnings capacity.

Debt/EquityStrong

Total debt relative to shareholder equity.

Current RatioStrong

Short-term liquidity — ability to pay near-term obligations.

Interest CoverageWeak

Earnings capacity relative to interest payments.

Valuation

70.5/100 (15%)

MIND Technology, Inc. trades at a reasonable valuation with decent earnings yield and FCF multiples.

Earnings YieldStrong

Inverse of forward P/E — higher yield means cheaper stock.

Moat

21/100 (30%)

MIND Technology, Inc. operates in a highly competitive environment with limited sustainable advantages. The Moat pillar evaluates competitive advantages across five dimensions: Switching Costs, Network Effects, Cost Advantage, Intangible Assets, and Scale & Ecosystem. Sign in to customize moat ratings for MIND.

Score Composition

Quality
34.6×25%8.7
Growth
19.3×20%3.9
Risk
82.4×15%12.4
Valuation
70.5×15%10.6
Moat
21.0×30%6.3
Total
40.7Average

Unlock Full MIND Analysis

Sign in to access detailed financial metrics, interactive price charts, custom pillar weights, 6 investor presets, and watchlist tracking.

✓ Detailed ratios✓ Price chart✓ Custom moat ratings✓ 6 investor presets✓ Watchlist
Analyze MIND in Detail →

More Stock Analysis

How is the MIND UQS Score Calculated?

The UQS (Unified Quality Score) for MIND Technology, Inc. is calculated using a proprietary 5-pillar framework with 25 financial metrics. Each pillar evaluates a different dimension on a 0–100 scale, then combines into a single weighted score. Scoring thresholds are calibrated per sector.

Quality (25%) measures profitability and capital efficiency — ROIC, ROE, margins, GP/Assets, and FCF Yield.

Moat (25%) assesses MIND Technology, Inc.'s competitive advantages across switching costs, network effects, cost advantages, intangible assets, and ecosystem scale.

Growth (20%) tracks revenue trajectory and earnings momentum, combining historical results with analyst forward estimates.

Risk (15%) is inversely scored — lower leverage and strong balance sheet health result in higher scores.

Valuation (15%) measures whether MIND Technology, Inc. is fairly priced using earnings yield, price-to-FCF, PEG ratio, and EV/EBITDA relative to sector peers.

Six investor-inspired presets are available, each with different pillar weights: Balanced, Buffett, Munger, Lynch, Cathie Wood, and Graham. The public score shown here uses the Balanced preset. Learn more in our FAQ.