Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$190.95
▼ $5.99 (-3.0%)
Market data updated: 09/19 09:45 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$40.93B
Day Range
$188.18 - $197.10
52-Week Range
$42.18 - $224.31
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$176.00
Resistance
$224.31
RVMD 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.
+322.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/24 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 7.14
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$63.49 vs. price $190.95 (-133.3%)
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
45
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
32
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
36
Risk
48
Sentiment
98
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 **Revolution Medicines, Inc.** has centered on the **FDA approval of its drug RASONQUE™ (daraxonrasib)**, the first broad RAS-targeted therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer, marking a major milestone. The company’s stock saw strong gains over years, though valuation concerns persist amid high expectations. Preclinical data for another drug, sabizabulin, also advanced into Phase 2 trials, while clinical results for RASONQUE in lung cancer were published in the *New England Journal of Medicine*. Discussions revolved around pricing ($39,800 per 30-day supply), investor sentiment, and future pipeline potential.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Revolution Medicines, Inc.. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
44
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
48
Psychology
54
Fundamentals
46
Technical
36
Valuation
38
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+17%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
48
Narrative Gap
+5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests a prevailing sense of euphoria for RVMD, anchored by a price level 53.4% above its 200‑day average and a strong news sentiment score of 80/100. The modest -0.8% price momentum and neutral RSI of 53 indicate limited price strength, while low volume (0.8× average) tempers the enthusiasm. Confirmation bias and overconfidence appear absent, implying the optimism may stem from recent favorable coverage rather than firm fundamentals. An open question remains whether the elevated valuation can be sustained if momentum turns more negative.
Updated: 09/10/2026, 05:53 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"US FDA approval of RASONQUE for adults with previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma"
"stock leans expensive rather than offering clear value"
"Phase 1/2 clinical data for RASONQUE in RAS mutant non-small cell lung cancer published in *New England Journal of Medicine*"
"Revolution Medicines has returned about 6x over the past 5 years"
📈 9D 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 splits methodologies into two stark camps: those emphasizing resilience and timing (like Walter Bagehot, who sees it as a liquidity fortress) and those flagging overvaluation or speculative risks (such as Morgan Housel and Philip Fisher, who dismiss it outright). Bagehot’s near-perfect score reflects a focus on liquidity and crisis survival, while Nelson and Mackay—with moderate scores—spot cyclical or crowd-driven opportunities. Meanwhile, Graham, Livermore, and Marks lean cautious, either due to valuation gaps, trend resistance, or late-cycle concerns, while the lowest scorers (Veblen, Fisher, Lynch) reject it for lacking growth stability or quality. The divide underscores whether the stock’s strength lies in defensive fundamentals (Bagehot) or speculative momentum (Nelson/Mackay), versus its perceived overpricing or volatility (Housel, Lynch).
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)
🟢 97
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 59
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 46
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 44
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 35
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 25
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 24
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 18
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 13
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 11
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
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 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (2 bullish · 7 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-69.3%
ROA
-48.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$5.95
Cash
$383.75M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
7.14
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$190.95
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$63.49
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-133.3%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-868.04M | $-796.37M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-840.92M | $-707.78M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-830.41M | $-641.23M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-835.60M | $-591.96M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-856.49M | $-556.66M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-913.73M
Terminal Value
$-13.51B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-8.78B
Enterprise Value
$-12.07B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-12.07B
*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
$8.58
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.21
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
MarketBeat · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Motley Fool · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Barrons.com · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Revolution Medicines, Inc. (RVMD) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 45/100, 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.
RVMD currently scores 45/100 (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, RVMD's estimated fair value is -$63.49, which is 133.3% below the current price of $190.95. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
RVMD's technical score is 36/100, 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: 7.14; Price is above the 200-day average; +15.2% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$63.49 vs. price $190.95 (-133.3%); Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.1% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for RVMD.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 24 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 2,853 | -2,853 | $209.56 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 999 | -999 | $207.33 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 706 | -706 | $206.60 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 4,730 | -4,730 | $210.50 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 3,587 | -3,587 | $208.55 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 3,844 | -3,844 | $211.36 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 371 | -371 | $212.27 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 7,271 | -7,271 | $204.35 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 300 | -300 | $200.56 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 625 | -625 | $206.15 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 12,919 | -12,919 | $202.48 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 26,160 | -26,160 | $203.55 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 2,128 | -2,128 | $205.19 |
| Kim Lorence H. | Open Market Sale | 31.8.2026 | 6,597 | -6,597 | $201.47 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 21.8.2026 | 347,330 | +80,000 | $4.73 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 317,285 | -24,917 | $208.37 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 270,951 | -6,583 | $211.33 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 64,234 | -190 | $207.25 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 267,330 | -3,621 | $212.08 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 61,932 | -1,351 | $209.28 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 277,534 | -3,813 | $210.25 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 63,283 | -951 | $208.36 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 281,347 | -35,938 | $209.26 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 63,310 | -937 | $208.36 |
| GOLDSMITH MARK A | Open Market Sale | 21.8.2026 | 342,202 | -5,128 | $207.23 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
9,727,133 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,519,784 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
61.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 59.2% 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