Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$7.85
▲ $0.63 (+8.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 12:05 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$353.41M
Day Range
$7.33 - $7.88
52-Week Range
$2.71 - $8.85
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$3.10
Resistance
$8.85
AGEN is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
+72.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 15/29 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
🟢 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: 100.0%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$52.00 vs. price $7.85 (-762.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (79/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
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
54
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
79
Quality
63
Value
38
Momentum
65
Risk
32
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
34
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of **Agenus Inc.** has focused on its **promising clinical trial results** for its **BOT+BAL immunotherapy combination**, particularly in metastatic and resectable colorectal cancer. Key headlines highlight a **peer-reviewed study linking durable survival in MSS metastatic colorectal cancer** to its immune-priming mechanism, as well as **updated Phase 2 NEST trial findings** showing **no observed recurrences** and high pathologic response rates (including 32% complete responses) in patients with resectable colon cancer. Additionally, the company’s stock has seen **momentum-driven attention**, with analyst adjustments and technical trading signals, though broader market comparisons and mixed analyst sentiment were also noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Agenus Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 3 vs. 3 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
26
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
47
Psychology
31
Fundamentals
34
Technical
65
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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)
+162%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
47
Narrative Gap
-5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
AGEN’s psychology is fragmented, with no single dominant state but notable **Euphoria** (32) and **Herding** (29) signals. The stock’s extreme valuation (+81.7% above 200-day avg.) contrasts with flat momentum, suggesting detached optimism despite weak technicals. Herding behavior is evident in its outsized underperformance relative to peers, but no panic or FOMO is confirmed. The key question remains: *Is the premium justified by fundamentals, or is this a speculative bubble?* Narrative-reality alignment is tight (gap: -1), but the lack of clear bias signals caution against extreme interpretations.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 01:26 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Peer-reviewed publication linking BOT+BAL’s durable survival in MSS metastatic colorectal cancer to its distinct immune-priming mechanism"
"No colorectal cancer recurrences observed at updated median follow-up of 32.2 months in NEST-1 and 23.5 months in NEST-2; 59% pathologic response"
"HC Wainwright maintains Buy on Agenus, lowers price target to $25"
"AGEN passes Minervini Trend Template & High Growth Momentum screen. Strong price action, 98.2 RS, triple-digit EPS growth"
📈 6D 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
Peter Lynch — 81/100
🔴 Weakest match
Walter Bagehot — 31/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for AGEN reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Peter Lynch’s high score and 'growth candidate' label suggest he sees untapped upside in the stock’s price relative to its potential, while Thorstein Veblen’s alignment with real value creation implies a more fundamental, productivity-driven optimism. In contrast, the lower scores from Graham, Bagehot, and Loeb—ranging from cautious to outright risk-flagged—stem from stricter valuation, liquidity, and risk thresholds, where even moderate deviations trigger red flags. Meanwhile, the middle-ground scores from Fisher, Housel, and Smith hint at a stock that may have merit but lacks the exceptional quality or effortless holding criteria those investors prioritize. The efficient-market camp and Marks’ cycle analysis further dilute enthusiasm, framing the stock as either unpickable or cyclically neutral, while the lowest scores (Nelson, Enterprising Graham) suggest technical or structural weaknesses that would deter even the most flexible investors.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 81
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 65
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 60
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 59
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 56
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 51
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 51
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 44
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 34
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 31
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (6 bullish · 3 bearish · 1 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.
Low 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
99.1%
Operating Margin
-17.7%
Net Margin
-2.7%
EBITDA Margin
-8.9%
ROE
1.1%
ROA
-1.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.00
Cash
$3.00M
Total Debt
$44.66M
Current Ratio
0.41
Debt/Equity
-0.16
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$7.85
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$52.00
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-762.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
12.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.0% | $-86.47M | $-79.33M |
| 2 | 9.6% | $-94.80M | $-79.79M |
| 3 | 7.3% | $-101.68M | $-78.51M |
| 4 | 4.9% | $-106.64M | $-75.55M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-109.30M | $-71.04M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-77.20M
Terminal Value
$-1.72B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.12B
Enterprise Value
$-1.50B
Net Debt
$41.66M
Equity Value
$-1.55B
*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
-$9.12
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$10.03
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 3 positive, 14 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Business Wire · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Business Wire · 28.8.2026
ChartMill · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
Business Wire · 26.8.2026
Benzinga · 26.8.2026
Benzinga · 21.8.2026
Benzinga · 20.8.2026
PR Newswire · 19.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 16.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
Zacks · 7.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
Associated Press · 7.8.2026
Agenus Inc. (AGEN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
AGEN currently scores 54/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. 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, AGEN's estimated fair value is -$52.00, which is 762.4% below the current price of $7.85. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AGEN's technical score is 65/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: 100.0%; Free cash flow growth: 51.4%; Net income growth: 98.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$52.00 vs. price $7.85 (-762.4%); Operating margin: -17.7% (negative); Net margin: -2.7% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AGEN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 1,971,500 | +1,971,500 | — |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.8.2026 | 1,971,500 | +1,971,500 | — |
| O'Day Steven J | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | — |
| Buell Jennifer | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Hirsch Susan B | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Corvese Brian | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | — |
| Wright Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| HARRISON THOMAS L | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Buell Jennifer | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Hirsch Susan B | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Wright Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Corvese Brian | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | — |
| O'Day Steven J | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | — |
| HARRISON THOMAS L | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.7.2026 | 4,852 | +4,852 | $3.35 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 10.7.2026 | 371,108 | +4,852 | $3.35 |
| HARRISON THOMAS L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 8,547 | +8,547 | $3.58 |
| Wright Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 2,267.765 | +2,267.765 | — |
| Wright Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 26,181 | +2,268 | — |
| HARRISON THOMAS L | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.7.2026 | 47,545 | +8,547 | $3.58 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 26.6.2026 | 5,364 | +5,364 | $3.03 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 4,925 | +4,925 | $3.30 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 12.6.2026 | 360,892 | +4,925 | $3.30 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 4,644 | +4,644 | $3.50 |
| ARMEN GARO H | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 355,967 | +4,644 | $3.50 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,689,181 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,232,820 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 65.3% 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