Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$1.34
▲ $0.04 (+3.1%)
Market data updated: 09/23 05:11 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/23/2026
News analyzed: 09/23/2026
Market Cap
$143.66M
Day Range
$1.31 - $1.36
52-Week Range
$1.25 - $3.54
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$1.25
Resistance
$1.91
-23.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/27 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
Free cash flow growth
Free cash flow growth: 21.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -1329.4% (negative)
Fundamental
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
35
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
67
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
9
Risk
40
Sentiment
32
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 Caribou Biosciences has primarily focused on its financial performance and analyst sentiment. The company reported a narrower-than-expected loss in Q2 2026, with earnings per share of $(0.24) surpassing estimates by 25%, though revenue fell short of projections at $1.499 million. Analysts at B of A Securities maintained a "Buy" rating but lowered their price target from $6 to $5. No major product updates or breakthroughs were highlighted in the limited available sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Caribou Biosciences, Inc.. News trend score: 32. Reason: 5 of the last 18 articles are negative, versus 2 positive.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
38
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
51
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
30
Technical
9
Valuation
50
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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).
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-22%
Market Narrative
25
Fundamental Reality
51
Narrative Gap
-26
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for CRBU suggests a dominant loss aversion bias, likely driven by a prolonged -14.0% decline over three months. Investors may be hesitant to sell further, despite neutral volume and modest volatility, reflecting a reluctance to realize losses. The narrative gap (-22) further implies a disconnect between market sentiment (optimistic) and technical reality (weak). The key question is whether this reluctance will sustain or if a catalyst—like a break below support—could trigger further selling.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:46 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"B of A Securities analyst Alec Stranahan maintains Caribou Biosciences with a Buy and lowers the price target from $6 to $5."
"Caribou Biosciences reported quarterly losses of $(0.24) per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate of $(0.32) by 25 percent, but sales missed $2.279M estimate."
"Caribou Biosciences Potential Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Cell Therapy Shows 'Durable' Responses."
"BMS and Gilead rule in the CAR-T space. Off-the-shelf developers aren’t trying to change that."
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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some investors seeing strong fundamentals and market positioning while others flag it as risky or misaligned with their core principles. The highest-scoring approaches—Charles Mackay, Walter Bagehot, and Benjamin Graham’s Defensive Investor—view it as a stable, low-risk opportunity, emphasizing liquidity, crowd behavior, and undervaluation. Meanwhile, cycle-focused thinkers like Howard Marks and Samuel Armstrong Nelson also rate it favorably, suggesting it’s positioned well within a broader market trend. However, the split becomes stark when comparing these to Fisher, Lynch, or Livermore, who dismiss it outright for lacking growth, quality, or alignment with momentum. Even Graham’s Enterprising Investor and Marks’ broader risk assessment lower the score, signaling concerns about valuation or risk tolerance. The contrast highlights how some methodologies prioritize defensive stability and liquidity, while others demand aggressive growth or trend confirmation—leaving little middle ground.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 100
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 99
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 95
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 81
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 72
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 67
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
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 36
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 36
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 26
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)
🔴 19
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 18
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
Based on the last 283 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 11 bearish · 0 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.
High 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
-1329.4%
Net Margin
-1327.4%
EBITDA Margin
-1296.7%
ROE
-121.2%
ROA
-84.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.59
Cash
$12.36M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
5.71
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$1.34
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$30.70
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% | $-140.44M | $-128.84M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-167.65M | $-141.11M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-190.70M | $-147.26M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-206.19M | $-146.07M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-211.35M | $-137.36M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-112.35M
Terminal Value
$-3.33B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-2.17B
Enterprise Value
$-2.87B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-2.87B
*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
$1.31
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.31
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 2 positive, 11 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 18 articles.
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.8.2026
MT Newswires · 14.8.2026
Zacks · 13.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
Pharma Voice · 29.7.2026
Zacks · 9.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 29.6.2026
MT Newswires · 11.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.6.2026
MarketBeat · 9.6.2026
Insider Monkey · 31.5.2026
GlobeNewswire · 27.5.2026
Caribou Biosciences, Inc. (CRBU) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 35/100, 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.
CRBU currently scores 35/100 (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.
CRBU's technical score is 9/100, 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: Free cash flow growth: 21.5%; Current ratio: 5.71; Revenue growth (last year): 11.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -1329.4% (negative); Net margin: -1327.4% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for CRBU.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 10 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kelly Timothy P | Open Market Sale | 25.2.2026 | 6,228 | -6,228 | $1.93 |
| Kelly Timothy P | Open Market Sale | 25.2.2026 | 73,125 | -6,228 | $1.93 |
| Albertson Tina M. | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 1,066 | -1,066 | $1.96 |
| Kelly Timothy P | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 3,147 | -3,147 | $1.96 |
| Khan Ruhi Ahmad | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 6,938 | -6,938 | $1.96 |
| MCCLUNG BARBARA G | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 6,938 | -6,938 | $1.96 |
| MCCLUNG BARBARA G | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 481,564 | -6,938 | $1.96 |
| Kelly Timothy P | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 79,353 | -3,147 | $1.96 |
| Khan Ruhi Ahmad | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 104,998 | -6,938 | $1.96 |
| Albertson Tina M. | Open Market Sale | 24.2.2026 | 68,523 | -1,066 | $1.96 |
| Zheng Ran | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| Albertson Tina M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 55,000 | +55,000 | — |
| Ryali Sriram | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 247,500 | +247,500 | — |
| Haurwitz Rachel E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 682,500 | +682,500 | — |
| Albertson Tina M. | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 247,500 | +247,500 | — |
| Haurwitz Rachel E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 151,700 | +151,700 | — |
| MCCLUNG BARBARA G | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 202,500 | +202,500 | — |
| Kelly Timothy P | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| Whiting Nancy | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| MCCLUNG BARBARA G | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| JOHNSON DAVID LEE | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| Ryali Sriram | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 55,000 | +55,000 | — |
| GUGGENHIME ANDREW | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| Khan Ruhi Ahmad | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
| Braunstein Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 20.2.2026 | 45,000 | +45,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
12,501,320 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 11,639,454 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
53.4% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 64.8% 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