Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$27.13
▲ $0.12 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 02:30 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$2.08B
Day Range
$26.95 - $27.30
52-Week Range
$16.10 - $33.07
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$25.09
Resistance
$33.06
PGNY 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.
+20.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 14/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $47.86 vs. price $27.13 (+76.4%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: -0.12 (3y annualized return -7.9% / max drawdown 67.2%)
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
65
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
9d ago · $27.08
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 11 to 36 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
67
Quality
58
Value
57
Momentum
66
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
56
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 Progyny, Inc. highlights its steady growth in fertility benefits management, with a focus on its expanding member base—reaching 7.2 million—and consistent revenue and earnings growth. Analysts, including Citizens’ Constantine Davides, have maintained a positive outlook, raising the price target to $33, while the company prepares to present at the Wells Fargo Healthcare Conference. The broader context includes Progyny’s positioning as a small-cap healthcare leader amid industry trends.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Progyny, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
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)
41
Psychology
27
Fundamentals
56
Technical
66
Valuation
57
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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)
+4%
Market Narrative
58
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+17
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a mixed but predominantly speculative mindset, with FOMO driving recent activity despite no clear panic or herding. The narrative gap (narrativeScore 51 vs. realityScore 41) implies traders may be overestimating momentum’s sustainability. Overconfidence hints at traders ignoring valuation discrepancies, while euphoria signals detached optimism. The key question: *Is this momentum self-sustaining, or will traders eventually reconcile price with discounted fundamentals?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:07 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Citizens analyst Constantine Davides maintains Progyny with a Market Outperform and raises the price target from $31 to $33."
"Progyny, Inc. offers fertility benefits management, growing eligible members to 7.2 million and posting steady revenue and EPS growth."
"Progyny (PGNY) offers affordable growth: strong expected EPS growth of 28%, forward P/E of 16.82, and a debt-free balance sheet."
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 7D 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 — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 31/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Walter Bagehot's documented focus on liquidity, the model estimates a very strong rating for PGNY, while Jesse Livermore and Jack Schwager, who prioritize price trends and disciplined risk‑reward setups, also assign relatively high scores. In contrast, value‑oriented investors such as Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, and Peter Lynch find the stock less compelling, reflected in scores below 50 and verdicts noting mixed or insufficient growth‑at‑reasonable‑price characteristics. Moderate‑midrange scores from Howard Marks, Morgan Housel, and Thorstein Veblen illustrate a split view where the business quality is acknowledged but expectations or profit conversion appear questionable. The most pessimistic view comes from Samuel Armstrong Nelson, whose low score highlights a perception of the cycle being stretched toward overbought, underscoring how cycle‑timing lenses diverge from liquidity‑ or trend‑focused approaches.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 93
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 65
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 62
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 54
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 49
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 48
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 47
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 47
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 42
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 37
Cycle looks stretched toward 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)
🔴 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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 32
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 3 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.
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
23.6%
Operating Margin
6.6%
Net Margin
4.5%
EBITDA Margin
7.0%
ROE
11.3%
ROA
7.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
$0.68
Cash
$112.24M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.73
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$27.13
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$47.86
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+76.4%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
18.7%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 18.7% | $227.56M | $208.77M |
| 2 | 14.6% | $260.82M | $219.53M |
| 3 | 10.6% | $288.41M | $222.70M |
| 4 | 6.5% | $307.26M | $217.67M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $314.95M | $204.69M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$191.78M
Terminal Value
$4.97B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$3.23B
Enterprise Value
$4.30B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$4.30B
*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
$5.74
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.45
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 11 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
StockStory · 10.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.8.2026
StockStory · 28.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
StockStory · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
StockStory · 25.8.2026
ChartMill · 25.8.2026
Progyny, Inc. (PGNY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 65/100, 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.
PGNY currently scores 65/100 (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, PGNY's estimated fair value is $47.86, which is 76.4% above the current price of $27.13. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PGNY's technical score is 66/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $47.86 vs. price $27.13 (+76.4%); Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 2.73.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: -0.12 (3y annualized return -7.9% / max drawdown 67.2%); Price is below the 50-day average; P/E: 41.7.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PGNY.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 8 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.9.2026 | 479 | -479 | $26.61 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.9.2026 | 479 | -479 | $26.61 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.9.2026 | 828 | -828 | $26.29 |
| Anevski Peter | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.9.2026 | 5,361 | -5,361 | $26.29 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.9.2026 | 1,532 | -1,532 | $26.29 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 224 | -224 | $25.66 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 28.8.2026 | 1,352 | -1,352 | $25.86 |
| Cummings Melissa B | Open Market Sale | 14.7.2026 | 2,244 | -2,244 | $31.60 |
| Cummings Melissa B | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.7.2026 | 1,193 | -1,193 | $31.98 |
| Cummings Melissa B | Tax Withholding in Shares | 14.7.2026 | 72,178 | -1,193 | $31.98 |
| Cummings Melissa B | Open Market Sale | 14.7.2026 | 69,934 | -2,244 | $31.60 |
| Clapp Geoffrey | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.6.2026 | 819 | -819 | $26.60 |
| Clapp Geoffrey | Tax Withholding in Shares | 17.6.2026 | 59,828 | -819 | $26.60 |
| Swartz Allison | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 599 | -599 | $25.08 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.6.2026 | 339 | -339 | $24.99 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.6.2026 | 339 | -339 | $24.99 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 599 | -599 | $25.50 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 1,918 | -1,918 | $25.50 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.6.2026 | 82,977 | -339 | $24.99 |
| Swartz Allison | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 82,378 | -599 | $25.08 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 4.6.2026 | 77,205 | -339 | $24.99 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 75,287 | -1,918 | $25.50 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Open Market Sale | 4.6.2026 | 74,688 | -599 | $25.50 |
| Livingston Mark S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.6.2026 | 1,082 | -1,082 | $25.12 |
| Swartz Allison | Tax Withholding in Shares | 3.6.2026 | 676 | -676 | $25.12 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
4,451,388 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,485,539 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
63.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 66.0% 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