Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$0.38
▼ $0.01 (-2.0%)
Market data updated: 09/18 09:28 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$36.93M
Day Range
$0.37 - $0.40
52-Week Range
$0.37 - $1.12
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
-63.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/27 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 5.30
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -40856.3% (negative)
Fundamental
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
34
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
1d ago · $0.38
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 6 to 52 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
45
Quality
42
Value
55
Momentum
6
Risk
40
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
30
Institutional
25
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 **aTyr Pharma** has centered on two key developments: first, the company’s **FDA protocol update for its Phase 3 trial of efzofitimod in pulmonary sarcoidosis**, with an expected regulatory response by mid-September 2026. Second, aTyr announced a **significant restructuring**, including a **60% workforce reduction** and program prioritization to focus on efzofitimod in interstitial lung disease (ILD), alongside narrowing its fiscal Q2 loss while maintaining $58.9 million in cash. Topline results from its Phase 2 SSc-ILD study are also anticipated in early 2027.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about aTyr Pharma, Inc.. News trend score: 56. Reason: 4 of the last 18 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
43
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
20
Psychology
63
Fundamentals
30
Technical
6
Valuation
55
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, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-16%
Market Narrative
35
Fundamental Reality
20
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ATYR suggests a dominant **confirmation bias**, where investors cling to a positive narrative despite clear fundamental deterioration (margin collapse and revenue decline). The narrative gap (+16) implies traders prioritize perceived upside over deteriorating metrics, a classic case of selective information processing. The absence of panic or euphoria signals points to a cautious but stubborn stance, likely anchored in pre-existing expectations. The key open question is whether this bias will persist as fundamentals worsen or if reality eventually forces a reassessment.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 04:49 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"anticipates response from FDA by mid-September 2026 on protocol submitted for planned Phase 3 study of efzofitimod"
"workforce reduction of approximately 60% and program prioritization conserves capital and aligns resources on efzofitimod program in ILD"
"Q2 loss narrows; reported quarterly losses of $(0.11) per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate"
"enrollment completed in Phase 2 EFZO-CONNECT™ study of efzofitimod in SSc-ILD; topline results expected in Q1 2027"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
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
Benjamin Graham — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Philip Fisher — 16/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between value-focused and cyclical methodologies, with a few outliers warning of volatility or instability. Benjamin Graham and his enterprising counterpart both see it as a compelling opportunity—Graham’s defensive model calls it *attractive*, while the enterprising version flags it as a *deep statistical discount*. Similarly, Mackay and Bagehot agree it lacks crowd mania or liquidity risks, reinforcing its stability. However, cyclical thinkers like Marks and Nelson see it as *early-to-mid cycle*, suggesting room for upside, while the broader Howard Marks model remains cautiously optimistic about *reasonably priced risk*. On the other end, Fisher, Lynch, and Livermore dismiss it outright—Fisher finds no *quality/growth signature*, Lynch rejects it for lacking *growth at a reasonable price*, and Livermore’s trend-following rule flags a *negative trend*. Meanwhile, volatility-averse voices like Housel and the efficient-market camp warn of *patient-holder shaking* or the simplicity of passive investing, while Veblen and Loeb raise concerns about *profitability* and *capital risk*. The contrast highlights a tension between value-driven conviction and caution about volatility or cyclical risks.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 99
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 99
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 99
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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)
🟢 93
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 83
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 69
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 44
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 35
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 25
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 19
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 16
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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
-40856.3%
Net Margin
-39009.5%
EBITDA Margin
-40506.8%
ROE
-109.8%
ROA
-79.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.80
Cash
$10.74M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
5.30
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$0.38
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$8.82
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-58.96M | $-54.09M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-57.12M | $-48.07M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-56.40M | $-43.55M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-56.76M | $-40.21M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-58.17M | $-37.81M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-62.06M
Terminal Value
$-917.37M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-596.23M
Enterprise Value
$-819.97M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-819.97M
*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
$0.73
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.73
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 4 positive, 11 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 18 articles.
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
Yahoo · 7.8.2026
Associated Press · 7.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 7.8.2026
Yahoo · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 31.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 15.7.2026
Trefis · 13.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 26.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 23.6.2026
aTyr Pharma, Inc. (ATYR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 34/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
ATYR currently scores 34/100 (Weak) 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.
ATYR's technical score is 6/100, 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: Current ratio: 5.30; Free cash flow growth: 10.3%; NAV per share: $0.73.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -40856.3% (negative); Net margin: -39009.5% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ATYR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 2 purchases and 6 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCHIMMEL PAUL | Open Market Purchase | 27.5.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $0.50 |
| SCHIMMEL PAUL | Open Market Purchase | 27.5.2026 | 779,143 | +100,000 | $0.50 |
| Coughlin Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Lucas Svetlana | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Gross Jane A | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Zaknoen Sara | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| BENEVICH ERIC | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| SCHIMMEL PAUL | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| SCHIMMEL PAUL | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Coughlin Timothy | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Zaknoen Sara | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| BENEVICH ERIC | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Gross Jane A | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Lucas Svetlana | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.5.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| DENYES NANCY | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 1,118 | -1,118 | $0.98 |
| Broadfoot Jill Marie | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 1,558 | -1,558 | $0.98 |
| Shukla Sanjay | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 3,745 | -3,745 | $0.98 |
| Broadfoot Jill Marie | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 37,296 | -1,558 | $0.98 |
| DENYES NANCY | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 33,124 | -1,118 | $0.98 |
| Shukla Sanjay | Open Market Sale | 4.2.2026 | 153,553 | -3,745 | $0.98 |
| DENYES NANCY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.2.2026 | 2,687 | -2,687 | — |
| DENYES NANCY | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.2.2026 | 2,687 | +2,687 | — |
| Broadfoot Jill Marie | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.2.2026 | 3,750 | -3,750 | — |
| Broadfoot Jill Marie | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.2.2026 | 3,750 | +3,750 | — |
| Shukla Sanjay | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.2.2026 | 10,375 | -10,375 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
9,279,033 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 9,726,056 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.5% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 50.0% 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