Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$125.31
▼ $2.31 (-1.8%)
Market data updated: 09/19 01:34 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$25.03B
Day Range
$125.23 - $128.70
52-Week Range
$81.09 - $132.60
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$110.56
Resistance
$132.60
INCY 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.
+47.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 18/25 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
🟢 Bullish
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 21.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
Technical
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
89/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
92/100
Analog Quality
-9.7%
Median 40D Outcome
45/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
40%
+8.1% … +15.7%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.1% … -0.1%
🔴 Bearish
53%
-10.9% … -7.5%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 40% (95% CI 20%–64%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -2.3%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
9 occurrence(s) · 33% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 13% (4%–38%) | -2.5% | -5.0% … -1.8% | -0.0% |
| 10D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.9% | -5.9% … +4.3% | -0.1% |
| 20D | 40% (20%–64%) | -2.3% | -8.7% … +8.9% | -0.2% |
| 40D | 40% (20%–64%) | -9.7% | -13.5% … +10.3% | -0.6% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -0.4% | -11.6% … +8.9% | -0.7% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-18 | 89/100 | Uptrend | -8.7% | -11.5% |
| 2019-04-01 | 83/100 | Uptrend | -10.6% | -0.4% |
| 2024-09-18 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +1.5% | +8.7% |
| 2022-07-25 | 82/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -8.7% | -11.8% |
| 2023-01-17 | 81/100 | Consolidation | -2.3% | -7.3% |
| 2019-07-31 | 81/100 | Uptrend | -4.2% | -8.7% |
| 2025-10-16 | 81/100 | Uptrend | +20.7% | +18.5% |
| 2020-07-22 | 80/100 | Uptrend | -8.6% | -14.1% |
| 2025-10-02 | 79/100 | Uptrend | +7.3% | +15.1% |
| 2024-10-03 | 79/100 | Uptrend | +10.6% | +2.1% |
| 2019-12-12 | 79/100 | Uptrend | -17.0% | -22.6% |
| 2024-10-17 | 79/100 | Uptrend | +17.0% | +9.1% |
| 2024-08-29 | 79/100 | Uptrend | -0.1% | +8.8% |
| 2023-02-06 | 77/100 | Uptrend | -11.8% | -19.3% |
| 2026-05-26 | 75/100 | Consolidation | +11.7% | +31.0% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLV (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
72
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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 26, 2026
Then
72
$129.72
Now
72
$125.31
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
74
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
75
Risk
56
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
79
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING INCY...
Recent media coverage of Incyte highlights its strong financial performance and strategic pivot. Analysts note the company’s impressive growth—outperforming the S&P 500—while emphasizing its shift from reliance on Jakafi to a broader pipeline of late-stage assets. Technical and momentum indicators suggest a breakout potential, though some caution about potential pullbacks remains. Investor conferences and discussions on drug pricing reforms also feature, reflecting broader industry shifts.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Incyte. 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
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
42
Psychology
34
Fundamentals
79
Technical
75
Valuation
50
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+29%
Market Narrative
66
Fundamental Reality
42
Narrative Gap
+24
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests investors are aligning with peer movements (-2.7% peer drop vs. INCY’s -1.9%), likely due to shared catalysts or risk-off sentiment. Euphoria persists despite negative momentum, as the stock remains 17.3% above its 200-day average with perfect sentiment, hinting at overvaluation bias. Overconfidence is evident in the stark disconnect between price performance (-1.3%) and EPS growth (+41.7%), implying traders may be ignoring fundamentals. The key open question is whether herding will sustain or if euphoria collapses under further negative momentum, given the narrative-reality gap (21 points).
Updated: 09/09/2026, 10:26 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Incyte is transitioning from a Jakafi-centric model to a diversified, multi-franchise biotech with several late-stage pipeline assets"
"Incyte Corporation outperformed, rising 34% versus the S&P 500's 15% since March 2026"
"renewed attention on upcoming ESMO data for its KRAS G12D inhibitor, known as 734"
"Incyte to Present at Upcoming Investor Conferences"
📈 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
Jack Schwager — 21/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock divides the historical methodologies sharply, with some models seeing it as a high-quality, growth-driven opportunity while others flag significant risks or market inefficiencies. The top scorers—Bagehot, Lynch, and Fisher—highlight its liquidity, growth potential, and exceptional fundamentals, suggesting it aligns with their principles of resilience, undervalued expansion, and durable competitive advantage. Conversely, the lower-scoring approaches, particularly those of Livermore, Marks (market cycle), and Schwager, warn against its speculative nature, late-cycle positioning, or lack of clear technical setup, reflecting skepticism about its long-term sustainability or timing. Even among growth-oriented investors like Veblen and Smith, the verdicts soften to 'reasonable' or 'aligned with value creation,' indicating caution rather than outright enthusiasm. The divergence underscores a tension between those who prioritize qualitative strength and those who emphasize defensive, structural, or market-timing concerns.
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 93
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 87
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 64
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 50
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 48
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 42
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 41
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
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
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 36
Cycle looks stretched toward 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
🔴 33
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 21
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
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 1 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.
Low 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
92.8%
Operating Margin
29.5%
Net Margin
25.0%
EBITDA Margin
31.3%
ROE
24.9%
ROA
18.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.59
Cash
$3.10B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.32
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$25.75
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$25.08
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 6 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 18.9.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Stocktwits · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
MT Newswires · 17.9.2026
StockStory · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Incyte (INCY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 72/100, rated "Strong". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
INCY currently scores 72/100 (Strong) 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.
INCY's technical score is 75/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 21.2%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 4173.3%; Net income growth: 3845.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for INCY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 4,551 | -4,551 | — |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 9,233 | +9,233 | $71.93 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 4,551 | +4,551 | $61.18 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 15.9.2026 | 9,233 | -9,233 | $120.50 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 9,233 | -9,233 | — |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 2,957 | -2,957 | — |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 15.9.2026 | 13,985 | -13,985 | $120.49 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 6,477 | -6,477 | — |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 6,477 | +6,477 | $64.25 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.9.2026 | 2,957 | +2,957 | $61.76 |
| Basi Ramitpal K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 25.8.2026 | 10,993 | -504 | $129.72 |
| Basi Ramitpal K | Tax Withholding in Shares | 25.8.2026 | 504 | -504 | $129.72 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 19.8.2026 | 10,801 | -10,801 | $125.56 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 10,803 | -10,803 | $120.04 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 194,001 | -10,803 | $120.04 |
| Mayes Patrick A | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 2,207 | -2,207 | $123.99 |
| Mayes Patrick A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.8.2026 | 2,207 | +2,207 | $106.47 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 10,640 | -10,640 | $122.69 |
| Mayes Patrick A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.8.2026 | 2,207 | -2,207 | — |
| Mayes Patrick A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.8.2026 | 0 | -2,207 | — |
| Mayes Patrick A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 5.8.2026 | 63,648 | +2,207 | $106.47 |
| CAGNONI PABLO J | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 204,804 | -10,640 | $122.69 |
| Mayes Patrick A | Open Market Sale | 5.8.2026 | 61,441 | -2,207 | $123.99 |
| Mayes Patrick A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 3.8.2026 | 6,055 | -6,055 | — |
| Mayes Patrick A | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 6,055 | -6,055 | $120.43 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
9,364,687 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 10,246,477 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
67.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 61.9% 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