Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$56.56
▼ $0.77 (-1.3%)
Market data updated: 09/19 07:37 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$55.63 - $59.34
52-Week Range
$44.12 - $78.48
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$45.89
Resistance
$62.53
CRSP 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.
-3.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/27 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$98.16 vs. price $56.56 (-273.5%)
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
51
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
26
Quality
58
Value
38
Momentum
72
Risk
40
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
30
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 of CRISPR Therapeutics AG has centered on its financial valuation and market positioning, particularly highlighting the success of its gene-editing therapy **CASGEVY**, which validates its CRISPR platform and strengthens its appeal for potential acquisitions. Analysts note the company’s $5.6 billion market cap and $1.78 billion in net cash, while positive data from **CTX310** has driven recent stock gains. However, discussions also emphasize the stock’s long-term underperformance, with a 52.9% decline over five years, and mixed valuation perceptions despite recent momentum. Speculation persists about its stock trajectory heading into late 2026.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about CRISPR Therapeutics AG - Common. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
21
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
24
Psychology
56
Fundamentals
30
Technical
72
Valuation
38
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+6%
Market Narrative
65
Fundamental Reality
24
Narrative Gap
+41
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The dominant psychological state here is **Confirmation Bias**, driven by a severe disconnect between optimistic narratives (score 54) and deteriorating fundamentals (score 24). Investors appear to selectively interpret data to justify their positions, ignoring revenue declines and a 176.8pp margin collapse. The lack of urgency (FOMO score 10) or panic (score 13) suggests complacency despite weak momentum (-5.8% ROC). The key question: *Will investors eventually confront the reality gap, or will the narrative persist?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:49 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"CRISPR Therapeutics stock has climbed... as CTX310 Data Impresses"
"$5.6B market cap and $1.78B net cash position offer acquisition appeal"
"CRISPR Therapeutics (CRSP) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock?"
📈 11D 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
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock divides historical methodologies sharply, with some seeing it as a resilient or cyclically favorable play while others dismiss it outright. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights its liquidity and credit resilience, suggesting it could weather financial stress, while Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s favorable cycle position implies it might be undervalued relative to its market cycle. However, the majority of investors—from Benjamin Graham’s cautious mixed verdict to Philip Fisher’s outright rejection—flag fundamental or qualitative flaws, with Fisher and Lynch dismissing it for lacking growth or quality. Meanwhile, efficiency skeptics like Malkiel/Bogle and Morgan Housel’s volatility warning underscore deep skepticism, framing it as either unpickable or too risky for patient long-term holders. The contrast between Bagehot’s liquidity focus and Lynch’s growth demands reveals a core tension: is this stock a defensive asset or a speculative gamble?
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)
🟡 58
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 53
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: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 46
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 44
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
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 38
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
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 32
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
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)
🔴 30
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 21
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 2 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 uptrend 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
—
Operating Margin
-18933.6%
Net Margin
-16569.8%
EBITDA Margin
-18378.7%
ROE
-30.3%
ROA
-25.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$6.47
Cash
$347.56M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
13.32
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$56.56
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$98.16
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-273.5%
🔴 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% | $-432.41M | $-396.71M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-516.19M | $-434.47M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-587.17M | $-453.40M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-634.87M | $-449.76M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-650.74M | $-422.94M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-345.93M
Terminal Value
$-10.26B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-6.67B
Enterprise Value
$-8.83B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-8.83B
*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
$21.37
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$21.37
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 6 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Motley Fool · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Motley Fool · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Motley Fool · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
CRISPR Therapeutics AG - Common (CRSP) 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.
CRSP 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, CRSP's estimated fair value is -$98.16, which is 273.5% below the current price of $56.56. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
CRSP's technical score is 72/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 13.32; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$98.16 vs. price $56.56 (-273.5%); Operating margin: -18933.6% (negative); Net margin: -16569.8% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CRSP.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 1 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prasad Raju | Gift | 7.8.2026 | 750 | -750 | — |
| Prasad Raju | Gift | 7.8.2026 | 14,815 | -750 | — |
| High Katherine A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| George Simeon | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Behbahani Ali | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Morrison Briggs | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Treco Douglas A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Fleming Harold Edward | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Rommel Christian | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Mahatme Sandesh | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Fardis Maria | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Greene John | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Mahatme Sandesh | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Fardis Maria | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| George Simeon | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Greene John | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Behbahani Ali | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| High Katherine A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Morrison Briggs | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Treco Douglas A | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Rommel Christian | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Fleming Harold Edward | Grant/Award from Employer | 5.6.2026 | 13,000 | +13,000 | — |
| Patel Naimish | Open Market Sale | 29.5.2026 | 3,786 | -3,786 | $55.62 |
| Patel Naimish | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 22,000 | +22,000 | — |
| Prasad Raju | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.5.2026 | 19,500 | +19,500 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,769,995 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 18,815,663 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
69.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 54.3% 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