Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$22.53
▼ $0.11 (-0.5%)
Market data updated: 09/26 05:18 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$733.48M
Day Range
$22.29 - $22.80
52-Week Range
$21.65 - $50.79
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$21.65
Resistance
$36.93
COLL 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.
-35.0% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/28 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
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $186.63 vs. price $22.53 (+728.4%)
Fair Value
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 4.7% of price
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
52
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
54
Quality
58
Value
67
Momentum
22
Risk
40
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
70
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 Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc. (NASDAQ: COLL) has centered on its Q2 2026 earnings performance, with analysts highlighting mixed signals—particularly the company’s ADHD drug expansion and challenges in its pain management business, which influenced revenue guidance. The firm also announced a $50 million accelerated share repurchase program, while analysts like Piper Sandler and Barclays adjusted their price targets downward, reflecting cautious optimism amid market volatility. Broader healthcare sector discussions occasionally included COLL as an undervalued opportunity.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
16
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
92
Fundamentals
70
Technical
22
Valuation
67
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-38%
Market Narrative
35
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
-6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixated on the 0.7% support level, likely due to recent proximity. Loss aversion is also active, as the 29.5% decline and elevated volume imply reluctance to crystallize losses. The narrative gap (-9) hints at a disconnect between perceived fundamentals (narrativeScore 32) and technical reality (realityScore 41). The key question is whether traders will break support or hold near-term, given the lack of panic or herd-driven momentum. Overconfidence and euphoria are absent, reinforcing cautious, anchored decision-making.
Updated: 09/06/2026, 04:59 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Barclays analyst Glen Santangelo lowers price target from $56 to $48"
"ADHD Portfolio Surges ... shaping guidance"
"$50 Million Accelerated Share Repurchase Agreement"
📈 4D 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
Charles Mackay — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Gerald M. Loeb — 29/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some models seeing strong potential while others flag significant concerns. At the top, technical and cyclical investors like Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Howard Marks (Market Cycle) rate it highly, suggesting it’s near a favorable cycle bottom or early-to-mid cycle with room to run. Meanwhile, disciplined traders like Jack Schwager and Philip Fisher also endorse it, emphasizing its structural quality and risk-reward balance. However, value-focused investors like Benjamin Graham and Peter Lynch are far more cautious, dismissing it as overpriced or lacking clear long-term fundamentals. The divide deepens with behavioral economists like Gerald M. Loeb and Jesse Livermore, who warn of excessive risk or a trend that contradicts their core principles. Even efficient-market adherents and liquidity-focused analysts like Walter Bagehot and Burton Malkiel & John Bogle see little compelling edge, while Thorstein Veblen’s critique hints at speculative overreach. The contrast highlights a tension between cyclical/technical optimism and value/growth skepticism.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 92
No obvious signs of crowd mania
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)
🟢 91
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 85
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 76
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 76
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 73
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 63
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)
🟡 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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 46
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 45
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 43
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 42
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)
🟡 36
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 29
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 287 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 9 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.
The stock is in a clear downtrend 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
59.3%
Operating Margin
23.0%
Net Margin
8.1%
EBITDA Margin
23.0%
ROE
20.8%
ROA
3.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.98
Cash
$231.25M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
1.57
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$22.53
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$186.63
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+728.4%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
19.1%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 19.1% | $390.03M | $357.83M |
| 2 | 14.9% | $448.24M | $377.28M |
| 3 | 10.8% | $496.57M | $383.44M |
| 4 | 6.6% | $529.55M | $375.15M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $542.79M | $352.78M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$327.58M
Terminal Value
$8.56B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.56B
Enterprise Value
$7.41B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$7.41B
*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
$7.60
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$12.94
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 9 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 19.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.8.2026
StockStory · 15.8.2026
MT Newswires · 13.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 13.8.2026
StockStory · 10.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 7.8.2026
Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc. (COLL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 52/100, 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.
COLL currently scores 52/100 (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, COLL's estimated fair value is $186.63, which is 728.4% above the current price of $22.53. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
COLL's technical score is 22/100, 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: Estimated fair value: $186.63 vs. price $22.53 (+728.4%); Revenue growth (last year): 23.6%; Free cash flow growth: 61.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 4.7% of price; Calmar: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.7% / max drawdown 56.2%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: -7.0%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for COLL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SANTINI GINO | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 8,700 | +8,700 | $16.49 |
| SANTINI GINO | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 8,700 | -8,700 | — |
| SANTINI GINO | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 112,483 | +8,700 | $16.49 |
| SANTINI GINO | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 8.6.2026 | 0 | -8,700 | — |
| Freund John Gordon | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 20 | -20 | $34.05 |
| Freund John Gordon | Open Market Sale | 18.5.2026 | 83,952 | -20 | $34.05 |
| Freund John Gordon | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 8,700 | -8,700 | — |
| Freund John Gordon | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 8,700 | +8,700 | $16.49 |
| Freund John Gordon | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 4,127 | -4,127 | $34.54 |
| Freund John Gordon | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 88,099 | +8,700 | $16.49 |
| Freund John Gordon | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 83,972 | -4,127 | $34.54 |
| Freund John Gordon | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.5.2026 | 0 | -8,700 | — |
| Balice-Gordon Rita J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| Lurker Nancy | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| Glancy Donovan Michael | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 17,482 | +17,482 | — |
| Paya Carlos V | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| Freund John Gordon | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| BOHLIN GAREN G | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| SANTINI GINO | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 8,741 | +8,741 | — |
| BOHLIN GAREN G | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 71,000 | +8,741 | — |
| SANTINI GINO | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 103,783 | +8,741 | — |
| Freund John Gordon | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 79,399 | +8,741 | — |
| Lurker Nancy | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 26,758 | +8,741 | — |
| Paya Carlos V | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 28,323 | +8,741 | — |
| Balice-Gordon Rita J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 61,370 | +8,741 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,675,115 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 6,063,781 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.5% 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