Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$16.40
▲ $0.17 (+1.0%)
Market data updated: 09/20 03:51 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$1.75B
Day Range
$16.12 - $16.44
52-Week Range
$4.96 - $18.89
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$11.52
Resistance
$18.89
PSNL 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.
+181.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/28 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
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 33.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$14.36 vs. price $16.40 (-187.5%)
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
48
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
62
Risk
64
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
27
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 Personalis, Inc. has centered on its pending acquisition by Tempus AI, which would grant Personalis shareholders Tempus shares valued at $16.25 each. The company’s stock has surged nearly 250% in the past year, hitting a three-year high, though it remains unprofitable and speculative. Analysts linked Tempus’s $1.5 billion acquisition to a melanoma breakthrough by Moderna and Merck, potentially validating Personalis’s role in cancer research. Market activity and institutional interest have also been noted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Personalis, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 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
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
33
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
27
Technical
62
Valuation
38
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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.
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)
+56%
Market Narrative
60
Fundamental Reality
33
Narrative Gap
+27
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant euphoria for PSNL is underpinned by a stark disconnect between its extreme narrative-sentiment score (98/100) and weak technical momentum (-1.7% ROC). Confirmation bias is elevated (36) due to a 28-point narrative gap, as fundamentals (revenue/margin declines) fail to justify the stock’s 59.8% premium to its 200-day average. Herding is muted, as the stock lagged peers today, suggesting selective enthusiasm rather than herd-driven rallies. The key question remains whether this euphoria persists despite deteriorating fundamentals or if sentiment will correct as the narrative gap widens further. The absence of panic or overconfidence signals keeps the bias toward complacency despite red flags.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:11 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Did its $1.5B Personalis Acquisition Just Get Validated?"
"Personalis (PSNL) has demonstrated exceptional momentum, gaining nearly 250% over the past year."
📈 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 — 73/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 1/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for PSNL reflects deep methodological contrasts between risk-focused and growth-oriented investors. Walter Bagehot’s high score highlights the company’s liquidity as a bulwark against systemic stress, aligning with his credit-centric lens, while Philip Fisher’s near-zero score dismisses it outright for lacking the long-term quality and growth Fisher prized. Meanwhile, the middle-ground methodologies—like Peter Lynch’s or the efficient-market approach—cautiously acknowledge potential but flag overvaluation or weak evidence for active picking. Howard Marks and Samuel Nelson’s low scores warn of late-cycle risks or overbought conditions, contrasting sharply with Gerald Loeb’s moderate risk assessment, which suggests a more measured, capital-preservation perspective. The debate ultimately hinges on whether PSNL’s strengths (liquidity, resilience) justify its valuation or if its volatility and speculative traits (as Housel or Mackay might argue) make it a speculative gamble rather than a core holding.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 73
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)
🟢 70
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 56
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 56
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 54
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 49
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 34
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 30
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 1
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (5 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 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
22.7%
Operating Margin
-126.4%
Net Margin
-116.7%
EBITDA Margin
-112.0%
ROE
-31.1%
ROA
-24.3%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.91
Cash
$124.25M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
6.76
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$16.40
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$14.36
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-187.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
3.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.5% | $-82.21M | $-75.42M |
| 2 | 3.2% | $-84.87M | $-71.43M |
| 3 | 3.0% | $-87.41M | $-67.49M |
| 4 | 2.7% | $-89.80M | $-63.62M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-92.05M | $-59.83M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-79.45M
Terminal Value
$-1.45B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-943.40M
Enterprise Value
$-1.28B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.28B
*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
$2.93
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.93
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 9 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GuruFocus.com · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
InvestorsHub · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Insider Monkey · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
Barchart · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 24.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 22.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 22.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 22.8.2026
Personalis, Inc. (PSNL) 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.
PSNL 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, PSNL's estimated fair value is -$14.36, which is 187.5% below the current price of $16.40. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PSNL's technical score is 62/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 33.6%; Calmar: 2.41 (3y annualized return 132.9% / max drawdown 55.2%); Current ratio: 6.76.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$14.36 vs. price $16.40 (-187.5%); Operating margin: -126.4% (negative); Net margin: -116.7% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for PSNL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 7 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen Richard | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $15.15 |
| Chen Richard | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| Chen Richard | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $2.44 |
| Chen Richard | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 273,880 | +100,000 | $2.44 |
| Chen Richard | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 173,880 | -100,000 | $15.15 |
| Chen Richard | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 0 | -100,000 | — |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 33,333 | -33,333 | — |
| Hall Christopher M | Open Market Sale | 9.7.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $15.08 |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $1.61 |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 66,667 | -66,667 | — |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 335,986 | +100,000 | $1.61 |
| Hall Christopher M | Open Market Sale | 9.7.2026 | 235,986 | -100,000 | $15.08 |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 133,333 | -66,667 | — |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 9.7.2026 | 0 | -33,333 | — |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.6.2026 | 4,982 | -4,982 | — |
| Tachibana Aaron | Open Market Sale | 29.6.2026 | 4,982 | -4,982 | $14.00 |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 29.6.2026 | 4,982 | +4,982 | $5.32 |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | — |
| Hall Christopher M | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 100,000 | +100,000 | $1.61 |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 28,832 | -28,832 | — |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 28,832 | +28,832 | $9.16 |
| Tachibana Aaron | Open Market Sale | 26.6.2026 | 51,251 | -51,251 | $13.18 |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 22,419 | -22,419 | — |
| Tachibana Aaron | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 26.6.2026 | 22,419 | +22,419 | $5.32 |
| Hall Christopher M | Open Market Sale | 26.6.2026 | 100,000 | -100,000 | $13.15 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
8,384,040 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 8,714,008 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
31.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 32.6% 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