Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$92.12
▼ $0.26 (-0.3%)
Market data updated: 09/16 02:32 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$1.55B
Day Range
$90.35 - $96.65
52-Week Range
$7.48 - $133.04
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
AGL 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.
+232.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.28
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$7.00 vs. price $92.12 (-107.6%)
Fair Value
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
45
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
32
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
46
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
30
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 Agilon Health, Inc. has centered on its financial performance and analyst reactions, with a focus on Q2 earnings comparisons to peers in the outpatient and specialty care sector. Analysts like JP Morgan raised their price target significantly to $85 while maintaining an Underweight rating, while another firm increased its target by 44.58%. The company also announced participation in the 2026 Jefferies Healthcare Services and Technology Conference, highlighting its ongoing efforts to engage with investors and showcase its role in empowering physician-driven healthcare transformation.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about agilon health, inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 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
41
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
30
Technical
46
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
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.
Price (3M)
-12%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+25
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
AGL’s psychology is dominated by **loss aversion**, as the 10.2% drop over three months and modest volume suggest investors are hesitant to lock in losses. Meanwhile, the **narrative gap** (+25) and stagnant fundamentals (0% revenue/margin growth) fuel **confirmation bias**, where positive sentiment (100/100) may blind participants to underlying weakness. The absence of panic or herding—despite peer underperformance—implies a cautious, defensive stance. The key question: will the extreme sentiment (100/100) sustain despite weak momentum, or will investors eventually confront the reality of stagnant growth?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 03:07 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Price target increased by 44.58% to 111.20"
"how Agilon Health (AGL) and Illumina (ILMN) have performed compared to their sector"
"management team will now participate in a fireside chat at the 2026 Jefferies Healthcare Services and Technology Conference"
"5 Insightful Analyst Questions From agilon health’s Q2 Earnings Call"
📈 3D 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
Jesse Livermore — 50/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The scores cluster in two bands – mid‑60s to low‑50s for investors who emphasize cycle position or market sentiment, and below 40 for those stressing fundamentals, risk and valuation. Based on Nelson’s and Mackay’s documented principles, the model estimates a neutral to slightly positive view, noting a mid‑cycle setting and emerging crowd enthusiasm, while the efficient‑market view flags only a mixed case for out‑performance. In contrast, Graham, Fisher, and the enterprising Graham framework, which prioritize intrinsic safety margins and quality growth, assign low scores and verdicts that the stock fails defensive criteria, quality/growth signatures, and is not statistically cheap. Meanwhile, risk‑oriented thinkers like Bagehot, Loeb, Livermore and Marks highlight liquidity concerns, trend negativity, and capital risk, resulting in modest to negative scores, explaining the overall spread in conclusions.
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟢 65
A real, well-supported case — deviating from a broad index may be justified here
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)
🟡 50
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 49
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 49
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 41
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 39
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 36
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 35
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 33
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 30
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 29
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 29
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 10
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 278 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 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 downtrend 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
—
Operating Margin
-7.8%
Net Margin
-6.6%
EBITDA Margin
-7.3%
ROE
-308.8%
ROA
-30.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$173.71M
Total Debt
$34.99M
Current Ratio
1.02
Debt/Equity
0.28
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$92.12
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$7.00
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-107.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-148.76M | $-136.47M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-177.58M | $-149.46M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-201.99M | $-155.98M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-218.41M | $-154.72M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-223.87M | $-145.50M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-119.00M
Terminal Value
$-3.53B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-2.29B
Enterprise Value
$-3.04B
Net Debt
$-138.72M
Equity Value
$-2.90B
*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
$0.31
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.15
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 8 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
Zacks · 28.8.2026
Fintel · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Business Wire · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
Business Wire · 20.8.2026
StockStory · 19.8.2026
StockStory · 14.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 12.8.2026
Fintel · 12.8.2026
agilon health, inc. (AGL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 45/100, 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.
AGL currently scores 45/100 (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, AGL's estimated fair value is -$7.00, which is 107.6% below the current price of $92.12. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
AGL's technical score is 46/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.28; Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$7.00 vs. price $92.12 (-107.6%); Operating margin: -7.8% (negative); Net margin: -6.6% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for AGL.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gertsch Timothy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 16.8.2026 | 17 | -17 | $96.90 |
| Zamore Denise | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 37 | -37 | $91.61 |
| Zamore Denise | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.8.2026 | 66,075 | -37 | $91.61 |
| Schwaneke Jeffrey A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 2,311 | -2,311 | $111.74 |
| Schwaneke Jeffrey A. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 138,031 | -2,311 | $111.74 |
| Mansukani Sharad | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| McLoughlin Karen | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| Wulf John William | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| WILLIAMS RONALD A | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| Battaglia Silvana | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| MCKENZIE DIANA | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 2,133 | +2,133 | — |
| WILLIAMS RONALD A | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 149,141 | +2,133 | — |
| Mansukani Sharad | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 56,242 | +2,133 | — |
| McLoughlin Karen | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 8,207 | +2,133 | — |
| MCKENZIE DIANA | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 7,633 | +2,133 | — |
| Battaglia Silvana | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 7,926 | +2,133 | — |
| Wulf John William | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.6.2026 | 16,765 | +2,133 | — |
| Zamore Denise | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 485 | -485 | $92.54 |
| Zamore Denise | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.6.2026 | 66,112 | -485 | $92.54 |
| Gertsch Timothy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.5.2026 | 8 | -8 | $86.39 |
| Gertsch Timothy | Tax Withholding in Shares | 24.5.2026 | 14,169 | -8 | $86.39 |
| O'Rourke Timothy Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| O'Rourke Timothy Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 120,000 | +120,000 | — |
| O'Rourke Timothy Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 120,000 | +120,000 | — |
| O'Rourke Timothy Patrick | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 320,000 | +200,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,080,524 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 872,239 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 67.9% 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