Celsius Weekly — 87% Off the High and Still Not CheapCelsius Holdings, Inc.BATS:CELHJahirSCelsius went from a sub-$5 stock to roughly 100 by early 2024 — one of the great small-cap runs of the cycle. It then lost about 87% of that, bottoming near 21 in early 2025. What followed matters more than the crash. Price rallied back to the mid-60s into late 2025, then failed and gave the entire move back. A recovery rally that retraces in full is distribution, not accumulation. Price is now back at the 23–26 band, a shelf that has acted as structure since 2021 and was undercut only briefly at the 2025 low. This week is a 4.17% bounce off it. The setup is legitimate — a well-defined multi-year level with a visible reaction. The problem is what the fundamentals look like at that level compared with the last two tests. STRUCTURE I'M WATCHING Support shelf ....... 23 – 26 ... Structure since 2021. Held 2022, 2023, and on a wick in 2025. The idea rests here. Hard invalidation ... 21 ....... The 2025 low. Below it there is no reference support for a long way down. Current ............. 28.25 .... Just above the shelf, reacting off it. First resistance .... 40 ....... The 2024 breakdown zone and old 2021–22 pivot. Second resistance ... 55 – 65 .. Where the 2025 rally died. Reclaiming this changes the chart's character. Old high ............ 100 ...... Not a level worth planning around from here. On the projection to 120–130: that is a pattern-matching overlay, not a forecast. It shows what a prior fractal did, not what this one will do. I am not treating it as a target. WHAT THE CHART IS TELLING ME - The shelf is real. Three separate tests across five years, all producing reactions. - The failed 2025 rally is the warning. A 21 > 65 > 28 round trip leaves everyone who bought the recovery underwater. That supply sits exactly where you would want to take profit. - Volume is unremarkable. 2.96M on a +4.17% week is not institutions stepping in. A support hold worth trading usually announces itself with a volume expansion. This has not yet. - Lower highs since early 2024. 100 > 72 > 65 is an intact weekly downtrend. Support tests inside a downtrend fail more often than they hold. FUNDAMENTAL BACKDROP (AND IT ARGUES AGAINST THE CHART) Market cap ......... 7.25B ... Full mid-cap valuation after an 87% drawdown P/E trailing ....... 67.4 .... Expensive on delivered earnings P/E forward ........ 36.8 .... Prices in a substantial earnings recovery Net margin ......... 4.03% ... Compressed hard from the ~15% peak in '23 Debt / equity ...... 2.08 .... Leveraged; a real change from the historically clean balance sheet Price / book ....... 5.79 .... No asset-value floor to lean on Piotroski F-score .. 3 / 9 ... Weak. Signals deteriorating financial health ROIC ............... ~4% ..... Plausibly below cost of capital Dividend ........... None .... No yield support at the lows Revenue is still growing but net margin has fallen since '23 — growth is being bought rather than earned. The leverage and margin compression are consistent with a debt-funded acquisition still being digested, alongside a slower category and distributor inventory effects. Verify the latest quarter yourself; integration progress is the swing factor. Bluntly: a Piotroski score of 3, a 4% net margin, 2.08 debt-to-equity and a 36.8 forward multiple is not a value setup. It is a growth stock that de-rated and has not yet fixed its economics. The chart offers a level; the fundamentals do not offer a reason to trust it. INVALIDATION A decisive weekly close below 21 kills the idea. Below the 2025 low there is no structural reference, and a broken multi-year shelf on a leveraged balance sheet is not something to average into. Softer warning: a weekly close back inside the band with no volume expansion marks this bounce as noise. RISKS WORTH NAMING - Support inside a downtrend. The dominant weekly structure is still lower highs. This trade fights the trend and size has to reflect that. - No fundamental floor. Price/book of 5.79 and no dividend mean nothing catches the stock if sentiment breaks. The 2025 low was not a valuation floor and neither is this. - Leverage cuts both ways. At 2.08 debt-to-equity a demand miss hits equity harder than it would have two years ago. - Concentrated exposure. One category, a concentrated distribution relationship, intense competition — including from brands the company now owns and has to not cannibalise. - The projection overlay is not evidence. TRADE PLAN Entry ......... Volume-backed weekly hold of 23 – 26 Invalidation .. Weekly close below 21 Target 1 ...... 40 Target 2 ...... 55 – 65 Sizing ........ Level trade with a hard stop, not a long-term position No position while price hangs mid-range without a volume signal. Not financial advice — my own chart interpretation, shared for discussion. Fundamental figures are read from a data panel and should be verified against current filings. Manage your own risk.