Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$7.88
▼ $0.08 (-1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 03:17 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$7.67 - $8.15
52-Week Range
$1.81 - $10.05
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$6.35
Resistance
$10.05
BFLY 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.
+309.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/29 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 63.9%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$1.24 vs. price $7.88 (-115.7%)
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
47
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
59
Quality
63
Value
38
Momentum
36
Risk
54
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
39
Institutional
4
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 Butterfly Network, Inc. has primarily focused on its strategic partnerships and expansion into emerging tech sectors. Notably, the company secured a multi-year licensing deal with Sam Altman-backed Merge Labs to supply its ultrasound-on-chip technology for brain-computer interfaces, marking a significant shift beyond traditional medical imaging. Additionally, there was brief mention of its inclusion among AI-focused small-cap stocks, though broader financial or operational updates were limited.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Butterfly Network, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 6 of the last 20 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
32
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
38
Fundamentals
39
Technical
36
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Price (3M)
-13%
Market Narrative
45
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+3
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a disconnect between extreme positive sentiment (100/100) and weak technicals, with no dominant psychological state. Euphoria is elevated due to the stock’s outperformance relative to peers and its +18.9% distance above the 200-day average, despite negative momentum. Overconfidence is implied by the divergence between price decline and EPS growth. The key open question is whether the narrative (optimism) will persist despite technical weakness, or if reality (momentum and valuation) will assert itself. The narrative-reality gap (12 points) hints at potential reversion.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 04:06 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"‘smaller AI focused stocks can often move quicker and test new ideas in automation, data and machine learning’"
"‘Merge Labs selected Butterfly Network as its exclusive ultrasound-on-chip supplier under a multiyear Butterfly Embedded agreement’"
"‘agreement gives Merge access to Butterfly’s Poseidon Family of Ultrasound-on-Chip™ technology for brain-computer interfaces’"
"‘Sam Altman-Backed Merge Labs Picked Butterfly’s Chips for Brain Interfaces’"
📈 8D 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
Thorstein Veblen — 21/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on his documented principles, the model estimates that Walter Bagehot views BFLY favorably due to its exceptional liquidity, while Samuel Armstrong Nelson sees an attractive cycle entry point given its oversold condition. Conversely, momentum and structural approaches register serious concern; Jesse Livermore's strategy penalized the stock for a prevailing negative trend, and Thorstein Veblen's framework flagged growth pursued primarily for its own sake. Fundamental and value models such as those of Peter Lynch, Philip Fisher, and Benjamin Graham land in the middle, acknowledging existing growth or potential but cautioning that current pricing and safety margins remain mixed. Ultimately, the simulation illustrates a clear divide between balance-sheet resilience indicators and unfavorable price momentum signals.
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 71
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
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)
🟢 68
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 62
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 60
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 59
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
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)
🟡 57
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 53
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)
🟡 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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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
🟡 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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 42
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 39
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)
🟡 39
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
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
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 (2 bullish · 6 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
46.9%
Operating Margin
-88.5%
Net Margin
-79.1%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-42.9%
ROA
-28.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.31
Cash
$150.49M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
4.02
Debt/Equity
0.00
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$7.88
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$1.24
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-115.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
11.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.1% | $-17.83M | $-16.36M |
| 2 | 8.9% | $-19.42M | $-16.35M |
| 3 | 6.8% | $-20.74M | $-16.02M |
| 4 | 4.6% | $-21.70M | $-15.38M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-22.25M | $-14.46M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-16.05M
Terminal Value
$-350.83M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-228.01M
Enterprise Value
$-306.57M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-306.57M
*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
$0.79
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.74
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 11 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Business Wire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
PR Newswire · 8.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 3.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
Business Wire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
Fintel · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
BFLY currently scores 47/100 (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, BFLY's estimated fair value is -$1.24, which is 115.7% below the current price of $7.88. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BFLY's technical score is 36/100, 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: Free cash flow growth: 63.9%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Debt/equity: 0.00.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$1.24 vs. price $7.88 (-115.7%); Operating margin: -88.5% (negative); Net margin: -79.1% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BFLY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 1 purchases and 22 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cashman Steve | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 140,112 | -140,112 | $7.30 |
| Carlson Megan | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 13,804 | -13,804 | $7.30 |
| Caezza Nicholas | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,709 | -1,709 | $8.15 |
| DEVIVO JOSEPH | Gift | 24.8.2026 | 7,353,700 | -250,000 | — |
| DEVIVO JOSEPH | Gift | 24.8.2026 | 250,000 | -250,000 | — |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 582,500 | -582,500 | $8.97 |
| Phanstiel S. Louise | Open Market Purchase | 14.8.2026 | 115,200 | +115,200 | $8.68 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 14.8.2026 | 824,700 | -824,700 | $8.70 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 500,000 | -500,000 | $9.24 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 175,300 | -175,300 | $8.86 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 215,233 | -215,233 | $9.54 |
| Caezza Nicholas | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 300,307 | -10,000 | $9.75 |
| Caezza Nicholas | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $9.75 |
| DEVIVO JOSEPH | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 7,603,700 | -68,346 | $10.01 |
| DEVIVO JOSEPH | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 68,346 | -68,346 | $10.01 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 156,163 | -156,163 | $8.10 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 12,458,763 | -156,163 | $8.10 |
| Carlson Megan | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 68,852 | -68,852 | $7.86 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 1,720,129 | -1,720,129 | $7.39 |
| ROBBINS LARRY | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 12,614,926 | -1,720,129 | $7.39 |
| Carlson Megan | Open Market Sale | 31.7.2026 | 425,889 | -68,852 | $7.86 |
| ROTHBERG JONATHAN M | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 496,680 | -496,680 | $6.47 |
| ROTHBERG JONATHAN M | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 72,724 | -72,724 | $6.47 |
| ROTHBERG JONATHAN M | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 36,366 | -36,366 | $6.47 |
| ROTHBERG JONATHAN M | Open Market Sale | 22.7.2026 | 54,143 | -54,143 | $6.47 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
34,062,017 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 32,688,557 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
51.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.5% 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