Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$3.68
▼ $0.21 (-5.4%)
Market data updated: 09/15 06:38 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$110.56M
Day Range
$3.67 - $3.89
52-Week Range
$3.67 - $9.16
Beta
—
Next Earnings
28.10.2026
BCYC 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.
-45.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/27 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
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 105.8%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -340.4% (negative)
Fundamental
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
41
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
40
Quality
58
Value
55
Momentum
13
Risk
40
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
30
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 **Bicycle Therapeutics plc** has primarily focused on its **stock performance** in U.S. trading, with fluctuations in its American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) across late 2026. Notably, the company faced a **downgrade to "Hold"** by SeekingAlpha in August 2026 due to the **deprioritization of its drug zelenectide pevedotin** after mixed results in urothelial cancer trials, shifting focus to a new tumor-targeting approach (EphA2+). Meanwhile, Needham analyst Ami Fadia maintained a **"Buy"** rating while slightly lowering the price target. No substantive updates on clinical progress or major corporate developments were reported.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bicycle Therapeutics plc. News trend score: 92. Reason: 12 of the last 19 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
32
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
55
Psychology
35
Fundamentals
30
Technical
13
Valuation
55
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-3%
Market Narrative
49
Fundamental Reality
55
Narrative Gap
-6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
BCYC’s market behavior suggests a **FOMO-driven rally**, reinforced by strong momentum, high sentiment, and overbought conditions. The narrative gap (68 vs. 55) implies traders may be overestimating positive catalysts, while overconfidence in price momentum over fundamentals hints at speculative positioning. The key question: *Is this momentum sustainable, or will profit-taking emerge near resistance?* Anchoring and slight volatility could signal early caution, but euphoria remains muted by underperformance vs. long-term averages.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 01:06 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"European Equities Traded in the US as American Depositary Receipts **Track Higher/Lower/Rise/Decline/Open Week Higher** in [various days]"
"Bicycle Therapeutics **deprioritized zelenectide pevedotin** after mixed progress in urothelial cancer. Stock downgraded to a **hold**."
"Needham analyst **maintains Buy on Bicycle Therapeutics**, lowers price target from $15 to $14."
"Bicycle Therapeutics **reported quarterly losses of $(0.72) per share**, missing estimates by 22.03%. Sales **missed by $4.221M**."
📈 3D 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
Benjamin Graham — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits historical methodologies into two stark camps: the value-focused investors who see it as a rare bargain and the more cautious or market-savvy strategists who flag it as overpriced or risky. Benjamin Graham—both in his defensive and enterprising forms—unanimously rates it as a standout opportunity, emphasizing its deep statistical undervaluation and robust liquidity, while Walter Bagehot’s credit-focused lens also declares it resilient in a crisis. In contrast, Fisher, Lynch, and Marks all express skepticism, noting that the stock’s price may already reflect its growth potential or that it sits in a late-cycle, high-expectation environment. Meanwhile, the most bearish methodologies—from Veblen’s critique of speculative growth to Housel’s warning about volatility—suggest the stock lacks the patience-friendly stability of a long-term holding, while Livermore and Schwager’s trend-following discipline outright dismisses it as a trade. The divide underscores whether the stock’s fundamentals justify its valuation or if it’s a speculative bet with hidden risks.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
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
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 74
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 63
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 49
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 48
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 48
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 40
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)
🔴 33
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)
🔴 21
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 21
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
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 276 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 bearish · 1 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.
A trading range after a decline, but still without clear (volume-based) confirmation of an accumulation phase.
Low confidence
$3.74
Range Bottom
$4.51
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
-340.4%
Net Margin
-301.7%
EBITDA Margin
-331.5%
ROE
-35.9%
ROA
-30.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.16
Cash
$628.11M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
11.98
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$3.68
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$92.82
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-315.03M | $-289.02M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-376.07M | $-316.53M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-427.78M | $-330.32M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-462.53M | $-327.67M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-474.10M | $-308.13M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-252.03M
Terminal Value
$-7.48B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-4.86B
Enterprise Value
$-6.43B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-6.43B
*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
$8.80
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$8.80
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 2 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 19 articles.
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 2.9.2026
MT Newswires · 28.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 21.8.2026
MT Newswires · 19.8.2026
MT Newswires · 17.8.2026
MT Newswires · 14.8.2026
MT Newswires · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 4.8.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
Business Wire · 30.7.2026
Benzinga · 30.7.2026
MT Newswires · 24.7.2026
Zacks · 3.7.2026
MT Newswires · 30.6.2026
MT Newswires · 17.6.2026
MT Newswires · 16.6.2026
MT Newswires · 22.5.2026
Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 41/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
BCYC currently scores 41/100 (Weak) 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.
BCYC's technical score is 13/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 105.8%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Current ratio: 11.98.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -340.4% (negative); Net margin: -301.7% (negative); ATR: 4.3% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BCYC.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 17 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skynner Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Thompson Travis Alvin | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Hannay Michael Charles Ferguson | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Skynner Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Thompson Travis Alvin | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Hannay Michael Charles Ferguson | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 43 | -43 | $4.31 |
| Thompson Travis Alvin | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 104 | -104 | $4.31 |
| Skynner Michael | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 532 | -532 | $4.31 |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 333 | -333 | $4.34 |
| Hannay Michael Charles Ferguson | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 255 | -255 | $4.31 |
| Lee Kevin | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 1,737 | -1,737 | $4.31 |
| Skynner Michael | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 157,171 | -532 | $4.31 |
| Lee Kevin | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 603,671 | -1,737 | $4.31 |
| Thompson Travis Alvin | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 64,441 | -104 | $4.31 |
| Hannay Michael Charles Ferguson | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 94,375 | -255 | $4.31 |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 91,385 | -43 | $4.31 |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Open Market Sale | 6.7.2026 | 91,052 | -333 | $4.34 |
| Perry Jennifer Scott | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 1,036 | -1,036 | $4.27 |
| Thompson Travis Alvin | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 819 | -819 | $4.27 |
| Skynner Michael | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 1,859 | -1,859 | $4.27 |
| Lee Kevin | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 5,905 | -5,905 | $4.27 |
| Hannay Michael Charles Ferguson | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 1,506 | -1,506 | $4.27 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,281,399 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 2,983,889 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
35.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 38.2% 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