Breaking News Emails

Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.
 / Updated 
By Annie Pei, CNBC

Apple shares have tanked over the past week, and the chart has fallen below a key technical indicator for the first time in years.

With the stock finishing Monday at $93.64 after falling as low as $92.40, Apple is poised to close below its 200-week moving average for the first time since 2009. For technical analyst Rich Ross of Evercore ISI, that is a worrying sign.

Read More from CNBC: Apple Just Did Something It Hasn't Done in 18 Years

The index, which averages the last 200 weekly closing prices has "only been breached one or two other times, and that was in the depths of the financial crisis," Ross said.

Meanwhile, its 200-day moving average is far above current levels.

"We have a clear breakdown below that 200-day moving average and on that snapback rally we fall into that 200-day as resistance," Ross said Monday on CNBC's "Trading Nation." "That's the hallmark of a stock that wants to go lower."

Another telling stat speaks to just how unremitting the recent declines have been. On Monday, Apple completed its first eight-day losing streak since July 1998.

However, Ross believes that from a longer-term perspective, Apple could be attractive.

Read More from CNBC: Dow Closes Up Triple Digits Despite Apple's 8-Day Losing Streak

"The stock [is] down almost 30 percent from an all-time high,[but it's] sitting on a key area of long-term support that's held for the last 13 years with the exception of the worst financial crisis in a generation. I don't mind this stock as a long-term entry point if you like the story," Ross said.

From a fundamental perspective, Stifel Nicolaus portfolio manager Chad Morganlander says the stock could present a compelling value.

"When you look at the valuation net of cash, Apple is sitting at around $65 per share with earnings of $8 per share," for a valuation of just eight times earnings, not including cash. "So we would be buyers of this thing if we had [a] three- or five-year time horizon," he said.

In the near-term, however, Ross and Morganlander agree that further losses are possible or even likely.