Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$43.39
▼ $3.32 (-7.1%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:31 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$7.28B
Day Range
$43.27 - $46.53
52-Week Range
$26.99 - $55.67
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$43.27
Resistance
$53.88
ALKS 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.
+52.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/28 factors positiveRisk: Medium
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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $56.27 vs. price $43.39 (+29.7%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.45 (3y annualized return 13.2% / max drawdown 29.3%)
Risk
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
51
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $43.39
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 8 to 35 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
37
Quality
58
Value
62
Momentum
20
Risk
48
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
71
Institutional
0
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 on Alkermes plc focuses on positive clinical trial results and financial developments. The Lancet Neurology published positive Phase 2 data for the company
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Alkermes plc. News trend score: 92. Reason: 7 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
32
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
40
Psychology
94
Fundamentals
71
Technical
20
Valuation
62
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-4%
Market Narrative
39
Fundamental Reality
40
Narrative Gap
-1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixating on the 3.0% support level, likely due to its proximity to current price. The narrative gap (44 vs. 40) hints at a slight disconnect between market perception and fundamentals, but the lack of extreme momentum or volatility keeps panic or euphoria muted. Herding is present but mild, as the stock underperformed peers modestly. The key question is whether the anchoring level holds or if traders will eventually reassess the stock’s valuation (-18% vs. DCF).
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:24 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"The Lancet Neurology published data from Alkermes’ positive Vibrance-1 Phase 2 study of alixorexton in adults with narcolepsy type 1"
"Alkermes (ALKS) stock up 1.7% since last earnings report"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 10D 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
Peter Lynch — 20/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on his documented principles, the model estimates that Walter Bagehot would view ALKS as strong in liquidity, giving it a perfect score, while Samuel Armstrong Nelson would see a favorable cycle position near oversold levels, also scoring near the top. In contrast, investors focusing on sentiment and speculation—such as Charles Mackay, who flags crowd excitement, and Jack Schwager, who sees no clear edge—assign moderate scores in the 50‑60 range, reflecting mixed signals. Value and defensive investors like Benjamin Graham and Gerald M. Loeb rate the stock much lower because it fails Graham’s safety criteria and presents moderate risk to capital, while growth‑oriented analysts such as Philip Fisher, Jesse Livermore, and Peter Lynch give it low scores for lacking the required quality, trend alignment, or growth‑at‑a‑reasonable‑price characteristics. Finally, macro‑ and behavioral thinkers, including Howard Marks (both versions), Thorstein Veblen, and the efficient‑market duo of Malkiel & Bogle, assign the lowest scores, seeing the stock as late‑cycle, overhyped growth, or insufficiently cheap relative to a broad index.
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)
🟢 100
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 72
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 68
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 53
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 51
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 49
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 44
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 41
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 39
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 30
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 29
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 20
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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 a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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 downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Medium 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
86.7%
Operating Margin
17.2%
Net Margin
16.4%
EBITDA Margin
19.0%
ROE
13.3%
ROA
9.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.47
Cash
$388.57M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.55
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$43.39
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$56.27
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+29.7%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
12.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.7% | $541.19M | $496.50M |
| 2 | 10.1% | $596.00M | $501.64M |
| 3 | 7.6% | $641.20M | $495.12M |
| 4 | 5.0% | $673.53M | $477.15M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $690.37M | $448.69M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$480.33M
Terminal Value
$10.89B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$7.08B
Enterprise Value
$9.49B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$9.49B
*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
$10.78
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$10.28
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 13 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Business Wire · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 29.8.2026
Motley Fool · 29.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Zacks · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 25.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
Business Wire · 24.8.2026
Zacks · 21.8.2026
Zacks · 21.8.2026
Zacks · 12.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 11.8.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 6.8.2026
Benzinga · 4.8.2026
Alkermes plc (ALKS) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 51/100, 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.
ALKS currently scores 51/100 (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, ALKS's estimated fair value is $56.27, which is 29.7% above the current price of $43.39. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ALKS's technical score is 20/100, which currently reads as bearish — 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: Estimated fair value: $56.27 vs. price $43.39 (+29.7%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 3.55.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.45 (3y annualized return 13.2% / max drawdown 29.3%); Revenue growth (last year): -5.2%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -34.1%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ALKS.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gaffin David Joseph | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 2,034 | -2,034 | $48.01 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | — |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 9,000 | -9,000 | $46.99 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.9.2026 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $24.59 |
| Nichols Christian Todd | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 664 | -664 | $49.65 |
| Nichols Christian Todd | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 6,912 | -6,912 | $49.19 |
| Jackson Blair Curtis | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 124,305 | +124,305 | — |
| Jackson Blair Curtis | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 93,229 | +93,229 | — |
| Jackson Blair Curtis | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 93,229 | +93,229 | — |
| Jackson Blair Curtis | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.8.2026 | 124,305 | +124,305 | — |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 4,896 | -4,896 | — |
| Gaffin David Joseph | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 2,034 | -2,034 | $48.58 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 9,000 | -9,000 | $48.58 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 104 | -104 | — |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 4,896 | +4,896 | $24.59 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 104 | +104 | $19.34 |
| snyderman nancy lynn MD | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 16,524 | -16,524 | — |
| snyderman nancy lynn MD | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 27,948 | -27,948 | — |
| snyderman nancy lynn MD | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 44,472 | -44,472 | $50.35 |
| snyderman nancy lynn MD | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 16,524 | +16,524 | $46.72 |
| snyderman nancy lynn MD | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 27,948 | +27,948 | $46.72 |
| Gaffin David Joseph | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 225,456 | -2,034 | $48.58 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 73,493 | +104 | $19.34 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 78,389 | +4,896 | $24.59 |
| Hopkinson Craig C. | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 69,389 | -9,000 | $48.58 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,717,404 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 14,406,911 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 37.5% 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