24-Hour Movers (2026-08-28)

Up 19.3% over 24 hours — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Down 13.1% over 24 hours on 3.0× baseline volume — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Up 12.9% over 24 hours — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Up 12.8% over 24 hours — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

IREN printed -13% on the session — the same day a $2.4 billion financing led by Blue Owl, raised to pay for its GPUs, was locked in. The piece that put it in a headline next to Applied Digital framed the day as a data-center selloff broadening out.

MechanismWhat is worth pausing on is that two pieces of news pointing in opposite directions sit on this same card. One is money coming in: several outlets and a press release all describe the same thing — funds managed by Blue Owl leading a $2.4 billion debt financing for IREN's GPUs and AI data centers. The other is the price leaving: in the same batch, one story puts IREN down 13% and Applied Digital down 7% in a single headline and says this data-center selloff has moved past one name, while a video segment pins the fall on a data-center transformation that is eating into profitability. The two are not contradictory. Landing the financing says somebody is willing to fund this route; the falling price says the market is repricing what the route is going to cost — and on this day it settled the second bill first. The boundary needs saying too: every source on this card is press coverage, not one is a document the company filed itself, which is why the badge on this row reads unattributed rather than primary. The badge is awarded for what can vouch for the move on the card, not for what the company actually did. The move starts at 15:30 UTC, away from the opening bell, so this time the lag really is measurable — what is measurable being when the price began to move, not why.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Down 12.5% over 24 hours on 3.1× baseline volume — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Down 12.4% over 24 hours — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.

Down 11.1% over 24 hours — no first-party event in the window lines up on both timing and scope.

Nothing in the window before the move began lines up on both timing and scope — not a first-party filing, not a press report. We would rather leave this blank than supply a reason that merely sounds plausible.