Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$8.40
▼ $0.40 (-4.5%)
Market data updated: 09/17 11:28 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$182.93M
Day Range
$8.32 - $8.82
52-Week Range
$4.50 - $10.14
Beta
—
Next Earnings
—
-6.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/26 factors positiveRisk: High
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 42.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$21.81 vs. price $8.40 (-359.7%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
50
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
46
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
52
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
35
Institutional
100
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of **Alpha Cognition Inc.** has centered on its financial and investor activity. The company reported **Q2 2026 earnings**, where it topped revenue estimates despite a net loss, while analysts like B. Riley and Zunveyl raised optimism about its stock, assigning a **$21 price target** and praising its neurodegenerative disease therapeutics pipeline. Additionally, the company disclosed **Nasdaq-compliant inducement stock grants** to executives, reflecting ongoing investor and board engagement.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Alpha Cognition Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
39
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
46
Fundamentals
35
Technical
52
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+32%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a detached euphoria—traders appear to prioritize sentiment and relative strength over fundamentals, as evidenced by the 34.2% premium to the 200-day average and perfect news sentiment. The narrative gap (64 vs. 50) implies a disconnect where optimism exceeds tangible momentum, a classic euphoria trait. However, the modest ROC (+0.2%) and RSI (58) hint at potential exhaustion rather than unsustainable rally. The key question: *Is this euphoria anchored in fundamentals, or will it collapse under the weight of reality?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 10:46 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"B. Riley Initiates Alpha Cognition at Buy With $21 Price Target"
"Alpha Cognition (ACOG) Stock Fair Value Rises After Zunveyl Analyst Optimism"
"Alpha Cognition Inc. Reports Q2 Loss, Tops Revenue Estimates"
📈 9D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep methodological disagreements about what truly matters in investing. Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights its resilience in liquidity crises, suggesting a defensive play that could weather financial stress, while Lynch’s high score hints at potential growth—though his caution stems from insufficient data. Meanwhile, Fisher and Housel’s zero scores reveal a stark contrast: Fisher’s strict quality/growth criteria and Housel’s aversion to volatility both reject the stock outright, framing it as either unworthy of long-term patience or too risky for disciplined holders. The middle-ground methodologies—like Graham’s mixed verdict or Malkiel/Bogle’s skepticism—underscore the lack of clear valuation or market inefficiency, leaving little room for conviction. Even the most bullish signals (Bagehot, Lynch) are tempered by others (Marks’ late-cycle warning, Mackay’s crowd-delusion flag), painting a picture of a stock that excels in niche scenarios but fails to meet broader standards.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 100
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 83
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 61
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 53
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 47
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 42
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 36
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 32
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 30
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 24
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 5 bearish · 2 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
The stock is in a clear uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High confidence
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
94.1%
Operating Margin
-221.7%
Net Margin
-202.2%
EBITDA Margin
-221.1%
ROE
-33.1%
ROA
-25.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.17
Cash
$66.05M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
8.65
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$8.40
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$21.81
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-359.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-22.74M | $-20.86M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-24.59M | $-20.70M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-26.13M | $-20.17M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-27.27M | $-19.32M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-27.95M | $-18.17M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-20.67M
Terminal Value
$-440.76M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-286.46M
Enterprise Value
$-385.68M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-385.68M
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$3.54
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.51
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 11 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Business Wire · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 20.8.2026
TMX Newsfile · 17.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 17.8.2026
Moby · 14.8.2026
Motley Fool · 14.8.2026
MarketBeat · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
Business Wire · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 12.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Business Wire · 3.8.2026
Zacks · 30.7.2026
Business Wire · 29.7.2026
Zacks · 28.7.2026
TipRanks · 23.7.2026
Alpha Cognition Inc. (ACOG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, rated "Moderate" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
ACOG currently scores 50/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, ACOG's estimated fair value is -$21.81, which is 359.7% below the current price of $8.40. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ACOG's technical score is 52/100, which currently reads as neutral — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 42.2%; Current ratio: 8.65; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$21.81 vs. price $8.40 (-359.7%); Operating margin: -221.7% (negative); Net margin: -202.2% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ACOG.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 25 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wills Robert James | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 32,241 | +10,000 | $9.62 |
| Wills Robert James | Open Market Purchase | 21.8.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $9.62 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 3.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $8.00 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 3.8.2026 | 3,048,223 | +50,000 | $8.00 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 31.7.2026 | 2,900 | +2,900 | $7.92 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 31.7.2026 | 2,998,223 | +2,900 | $7.92 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 24.7.2026 | 130 | +130 | $7.90 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 24.7.2026 | 2,995,323 | +130 | $7.90 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 23.7.2026 | 49,849 | +49,849 | $7.80 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 23.7.2026 | 2,995,193 | +49,849 | $7.80 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 22.7.2026 | 140,237 | +140,237 | $7.83 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 22.7.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $7.83 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 22.7.2026 | 2,945,344 | +140,237 | $7.83 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 22.7.2026 | 100,000 | +10,000 | $7.83 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 26.6.2026 | 152,336 | +152,336 | $6.40 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 25.6.2026 | 197 | +197 | $6.50 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 4,550 | +4,550 | $5.99 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 2,652,574 | +4,550 | $5.99 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 273 | +273 | $5.93 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2026 | 2,648,024 | +273 | $5.93 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 11.6.2026 | 2,862 | +2,862 | $5.91 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 11.6.2026 | 2,647,751 | +2,862 | $5.91 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 10.6.2026 | 5,872 | +5,872 | $5.99 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 10.6.2026 | 2,644,889 | +5,872 | $5.99 |
| Opaleye Management Inc. | Open Market Purchase | 9.6.2026 | 24,856 | +24,856 | $5.98 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
211,277 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 184,591 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
34.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 31.9% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology