Lam Research

Base 50, components added, then compressed onto a 2-98 scale. The formula is published and identical on every page.

Trading sessions only, so each step is one market day against the one before it. Free history covers the last 30 days; scores are recorded after every US close.

At the Friday 28 August close, LRCX scored 23, 26th of the 34 names here, and only one input sat above the board's median for it: volatility at +2.9. The other five were at or below where the typical name on this board was reading, so the score rested on that one component rather than on broad agreement between them. Pulling the other way was momentum at -11.6 — the day's move against the previous close.

Across the 20 sessions recorded since 30 July, LRCX has scored between 23 and 77, and that 23 sits near the bottom of that range. Net across the window it is down 33 points, and the largest single-session move was a rise of 40 points on 4 August.

Figures, not reasons. Every number above is the formula's own output for Lam Research or a score this site published on a named day; the score describes how the price behaved and has no view on why.

Posts on X carrying $LRCX, counted by this site directly against the X API over Thursday 27 August, retweets excluded. Weekdays only - weekend counts are collected but run around half a weekday across the whole board, so they are withheld rather than charted beside trading days.

This measures how much Lam Research is being talked about, not whether the talk is positive. Across the whole board, post volume has no relationship with the direction of a day's move - the numbers are here. It sits beside the sentiment score rather than inside it. Full X mentions board →