Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$9.82
▼ $0.08 (-0.8%)
Market data updated: 09/20 03:18 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$859.23M
Day Range
$9.75 - $9.93
52-Week Range
$6.65 - $36.26
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$9.44
Resistance
$12.53
OLMA 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.
+15.4% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/21 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: 9.95
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 5.7% of price
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
43
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
49
Quality
No data available
Value
50
Momentum
29
Risk
40
Sentiment
50
Fundamental
46
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 Olema Pharmaceuticals has centered on its financial and operational updates, including the appointment of Jason O’Byrne as Chief Financial Officer and a widening Q2 loss. Analysts from JP Morgan, Citigroup, and HC Wainwright maintained positive ratings but lowered their price targets, reflecting cautious optimism. Notably, the company’s Phase 3 breast cancer trial (OPERA-01) reached enrollment, with top-line results delayed to Q1 2027, impacting investor sentiment.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Olema Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. News trend score: 50. Reason: The mix of positive and negative articles is balanced — 5 vs. 5 out of the last 20 articles.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
24
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
28
Fundamentals
46
Technical
29
Valuation
50
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
+3%
Market Narrative
36
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-14
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
OLMA’s market behavior suggests **FOMO** as the dominant psychological force, driven by positive momentum, moderate volume, and overbought Bollinger Bands. The neutral RSI and mild sentiment prevent panic or euphoria, while peer underperformance eliminates herding. The slight price-momentum outpacing EPS growth hints at cautious overconfidence, but no clear bias dominates beyond FOMO. The key question: *Will momentum sustain despite the stock’s 13.7% underperformance vs. its 200-day average?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:01 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"JP Morgan lowers price target from $52 to $46"
"top-line data now expected in Q1 2027"
"Olema Pharmaceuticals Q2 loss widens"
📈 9D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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
Charles Mackay — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for OLMA reflects deep methodological contrasts: Bagehot and Mackay’s high scores (100 and 96) suggest a resilient, non-speculative opportunity, while the opposite end—Housel (0) and Livermore (31)—warns of volatility and trend resistance. Graham’s defensive (72) and enterprising (45) scores split on valuation depth, with the latter dismissing it as a shallow bargain, while Marks’ cycle-aware (79) and risk-focused (72) approaches agree on relative safety but differ on timing. Fisher and Lynch’s mid-range scores (50) stem from data gaps, but their caution contrasts with Schwager’s (35) and Loeb’s (39) outright rejection, which flag structural risks. Meanwhile, Veblen’s (13) and Smith’s (15) low scores highlight behavioral and growth concerns, while Malkiel/Bogle’s (26) skepticism leans toward passive investing. The debate hinges on whether OLMA’s stability (Bagehot/Mackay) outweighs its speculative or cyclical risks (Livermore/Housel), with fundamentals (Graham) and discipline (Schwager) offering conflicting lenses.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 79
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 78
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 72
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 68
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 52
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 28
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)
🔴 19
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 13
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
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 · 7 bearish · 3 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-33.9%
ROA
-30.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.87
Cash
$48.30M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
9.95
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
$5.50
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.50
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 10 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
ChartMill · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 31.8.2026
MT Newswires · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
Olema Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (OLMA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, rated "Weak" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
OLMA currently scores 43/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
OLMA's technical score is 29/100, 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: 9.95; +1.3% over the last 3 months relative to the index; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 15.0%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 5.7% of price; Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -8.1% / max drawdown 82.1%); Return on equity (ROE): -33.9% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for OLMA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| O'Byrne Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 1.9.2026 | 650,000 | +650,000 | — |
| Harmon Cyrus | Open Market Sale | 24.7.2026 | 12,500 | -12,500 | $11.71 |
| Harmon Cyrus | Open Market Sale | 24.7.2026 | 702,770 | -12,500 | $11.71 |
| Harmon Cyrus | Open Market Sale | 23.7.2026 | 12,500 | -12,500 | $11.58 |
| Harmon Cyrus | Open Market Sale | 23.7.2026 | 715,270 | -12,500 | $11.58 |
| BUTITTA CYNTHIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| CLARK IAN T | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Harmon Cyrus | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Hrustanovic Gorjan | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Garland J. Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| BVF PARTNERS L P/IL | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Horning Sandra | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Raman Prakash | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| RAPPAPORT ANDREW | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Larson Yi | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Graham G. Walmsley | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| BIOTECHNOLOGY VALUE FUND L P | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| RAPPAPORT ANDREW | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| BUTITTA CYNTHIA M | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| CLARK IAN T | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Garland J. Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Horning Sandra | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Graham G. Walmsley | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Larson Yi | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
| Hrustanovic Gorjan | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 29,500 | +29,500 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
15,663,548 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 15,963,215 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
46.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.7% 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