yeah we've all seen the spikes on announcements or on rumour/recommendation from the right sorts of people that cause the day traders to flock to a stock and then that stock tends to get mucked around with for a fair while until people tire of it - there's dozens of them at any point in time (RAU, CUL, RMI, WMT, ARE, AEX etc. are all recent examples)
I'm more curious for a longer term up trend on a stock that has sound and building fundamentals, whether the quietly undiscovered stock will build a more sustainable rise over time rather than one thats had the limelight shone on it too early and thus copped the day trader pack effect.
The more I'm thinking about it I don't think it really matters that much, in the longer run the fundamentals will ultimately influence the price direction. While in the short to medium term trade/market psychology effects will prevail and often can cause moves that dwarf fundamental factors completely. But in the longer term sustainable price re-ratings upwards or downwards tend to be driven by fundamentals.
Shorter term price behaviour also tends to depend on the activity and behaviour of the larger players in a stock and their agenda. (e.g. stocks like TNG, AGM, CQT, HEG, CDU, CQT all seem to have shown signs of more orchestrated price management by larger players at different points or maybe I'm just seeing conspiracy theories. But some of those have also had a single substantial shareholder that has been accumulating/distributing at different points in time).