Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$15.42
▼ $0.02 (-0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/22 02:26 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/22/2026
News analyzed: 09/22/2026
Market Cap
$637.35M
Day Range
$15.13 - $15.50
52-Week Range
$9.39 - $16.29
Beta
—
Next Earnings
01.10.2026
Support
$12.31
Resistance
$16.29
ANGO 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.
+43.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/27 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 103.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $0.18 vs. price $15.42 (-98.9%)
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
54
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
69
Risk
56
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
35
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 AngioDynamics (ANGO) has centered on its fiscal 2027 outlook, with a focus on shifting revenue dynamics as medical technology (Med Tech) is projected to become its majority revenue source. Analysts highlight growth potential amid tariff risks, rising costs, and margin pressures, while the stock has seen notable gains—up 8.9% since its last earnings report and a 33.5% rise over three months. Investor attention remains divided between Med Tech expansion and execution challenges.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about AngioDynamics, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 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)
36
Psychology
51
Fundamentals
35
Technical
69
Valuation
38
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.
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)
+25%
Market Narrative
75
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+39
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a disconnect between extreme valuation metrics and technical momentum, consistent with euphoric overconfidence. Investors may be anchoring to recent highs (+21.5% above 200-day average) while ignoring fundamental divergence. The key open question is whether the narrative gap (72 vs. 36) will persist or force a re-evaluation of overvalued expectations. Low herding and confirmation bias scores imply selective participation, not broad consensus.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:00 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"AngioDynamics Sees MedTech Becoming Majority of Revenue in Fiscal 2027"
"tariffs, rising costs and execution risks keep the buy case uncertain"
"Med Tech growth and reimbursement gains strengthen its outlook, but... keep execution risks high"
"ANGO Jumps 33.5% in 3 Months: Can the Rally Keep Going?"
📈 5D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 67/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 12/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark contrast in verdicts for ANGO reflects deep methodological divides between investors prioritizing technical cycles, liquidity, and risk tolerance versus those demanding fundamental strength or market efficiency. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score and bullish cycle reading stand out as an outlier, suggesting he’d see this stock as undervalued relative to its historical price swings—something not reflected in the more cautious or skeptical frameworks. Meanwhile, the majority of investors—particularly Benjamin Graham, Peter Lynch, and Thorstein Veblen—reject the stock outright due to its perceived lack of defensive qualities, growth potential, or alignment with long-term stability. Even moderate scorers like Morgan Housel and Gerald M. Loeb acknowledge it’s holdable but not compelling, while efficient-market adherents dismiss it as unworthy of active selection. The divergence underscores whether one trusts short-term momentum (Nelson) or fundamental durability (Graham, Lynch), with few methodologies finding a middle ground.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 67
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 62
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 62
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 59
Moderate risk 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)
🟡 50
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 46
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 43
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 42
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)
🟡 40
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 36
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 32
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)
🔴 26
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 20
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 19
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
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
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 (6 bullish · 2 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
54.6%
Operating Margin
-12.5%
Net Margin
-11.5%
EBITDA Margin
-5.3%
ROE
-21.5%
ROA
-13.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.88
Cash
$53.86M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.19
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$15.42
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$0.18
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-98.9%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-1.5%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -1.5% | $500.25K | $458.94K |
| 2 | -0.5% | $497.65K | $418.86K |
| 3 | 0.5% | $500.07K | $386.15K |
| 4 | 1.5% | $507.54K | $359.55K |
| 5 | 2.5% | $520.23K | $338.11K |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$508.00K
Terminal Value
$8.20M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.33M
Enterprise Value
$7.29M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$7.29M
*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
$4.11
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.50
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 12.8.2026
MarketBeat · 11.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Yahoo · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Yahoo · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Yahoo · 6.8.2026
Business Wire · 28.7.2026
Yahoo · 28.7.2026
Motley Fool · 21.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 21.7.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.7.2026
Zacks · 15.7.2026
Moby · 15.7.2026
Benzinga · 15.7.2026
Benzinga · 15.7.2026
AngioDynamics, Inc. (ANGO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 54/100, 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.
ANGO currently scores 54/100 (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, ANGO's estimated fair value is $0.18, which is 98.9% below the current price of $15.42. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ANGO's technical score is 69/100, 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: Free cash flow growth: 103.5%; Current ratio: 2.19; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $0.18 vs. price $15.42 (-98.9%); Operating margin: -12.5% (negative); Net margin: -11.5% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ANGO.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nighan Warren JR | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 23,370 | -23,370 | $14.72 |
| Nighan Warren JR | Open Market Sale | 30.7.2026 | 64,745 | -23,370 | $14.72 |
| Piccinini Laura | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 28,336 | -28,336 | — |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 2,330 | -2,330 | $13.82 |
| Nighan Warren JR | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 5,694 | +5,694 | — |
| Nighan Warren JR | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 20,052 | -20,052 | — |
| Clemmer James C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 184,361 | -184,361 | — |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 22,768 | -22,768 | — |
| Clemmer James C | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 26,728 | -26,728 | $13.82 |
| Clemmer James C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 52,358 | +52,358 | — |
| Piccinini Laura | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 8,047 | +8,047 | — |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 6,466 | +6,466 | — |
| Trowbridge Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 57,381 | -57,381 | — |
| Trowbridge Stephen A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 8,319 | -8,319 | $13.82 |
| Nighan Warren JR | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 1,671 | -1,671 | $13.82 |
| Piccinini Laura | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 4,506 | -4,506 | $13.82 |
| Trowbridge Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 16,296 | +16,296 | — |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 111,006 | +6,466 | — |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 108,676 | -2,330 | $13.82 |
| Campbell Chad Thomas | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 0 | -22,768 | — |
| Clemmer James C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 889,176 | +52,358 | — |
| Clemmer James C | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 862,448 | -26,728 | $13.82 |
| Clemmer James C | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 0 | -184,361 | — |
| Trowbridge Stephen A | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 22.7.2026 | 314,115 | +16,296 | — |
| Trowbridge Stephen A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.7.2026 | 305,796 | -8,319 | $13.82 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
1,363,549 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 1,221,837 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
18.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 41.1% 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