Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Industrials · ·
$3.62
▼ $0.03 (-0.8%)
Market data updated: 09/26 05:10 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/26/2026
News analyzed: 09/26/2026
Market Cap
$312.09M
Day Range
$3.56 - $3.71
52-Week Range
$3.42 - $19.11
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$3.42
Resistance
$14.76
EYPT is a stock from the Industrials sector — Manufacturing, aerospace, defense, and infrastructure — closely tied to capital-investment cycles and economic growth.
-72.6% (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
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 8.88
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -776.0% (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
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
26
Quality
42
Value
55
Momentum
19
Risk
40
Sentiment
56
Fundamental
30
Institutional
40
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 EyePoint, Inc. has centered on its Phase 3 LUGANO trial failure for Duravyu in wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD), where the drug missed its primary endpoint due to an anomalous cohort, causing a sharp stock decline. Analysts have downgraded the company’s valuation, questioning its risk-reward profile and commercial viability against established treatments like Eylea. Despite some optimism from competitors (Apellis, Lytenava) that trial setbacks may not be fatal, the overall sentiment remains cautious, with investors and analysts urging caution. The company has also announced participation in upcoming investor conferences.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about EyePoint, Inc.. News trend score: 56. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
20
Psychology
91
Fundamentals
30
Technical
19
Valuation
55
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price (3M)
-73%
Market Narrative
35
Fundamental Reality
20
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s extreme loss aversion (score 100) reflects a deep psychological aversion to further declines, amplified by a 61.1% drawdown over three months. While panic selling (50) and herding (44) linger, weak volume and controlled volatility suggest hesitation rather than disorder. The narrative gap (+8) hints at lingering optimism, but deteriorating fundamentals (revenue/margin) may erode confirmation bias. The key question: will traders prioritize risk aversion or exploit perceived undervaluation?
Updated: 09/05/2026, 06:09 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Duravyu in wet AMD failed the primary endpoint due to an anomalous cohort"
"EyePoint, Inc. is rated a Sell, citing unfavorable risk/reward"
"EyePoint Faces Regulatory Uncertainty After Lugano Trial Miss"
📈 12D 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 starkly opposing camps: the value and cycle-focused investors who see it as a compelling opportunity, and the growth, trend, and stability-oriented strategists who dismiss it outright. Benjamin Graham—both in his defensive and enterprising forms—alongside Walter Bagehot and Howard Marks (market cycle), all score it perfectly, emphasizing its deep valuation, liquidity, and favorable position within a market cycle, suggesting it aligns with disciplined, risk-aware investing. Even Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s slightly lower score (93) still leans toward a favorable cycle position, reinforcing the consensus among these schools. In contrast, the lower-scoring methodologies—like Jesse Livermore’s (26) and Philip Fisher’s (7)—reject it for violating core principles: Livermore’s trend-following rule and Fisher’s growth-quality criteria. Meanwhile, the near-zero scores from Morgan Housel and the efficient-market camp highlight its volatility and lack of long-term stability, framing it as a speculative bet rather than a patient investor’s hold. The divide underscores a fundamental tension between those who prioritize undervaluation and cyclical positioning and those who demand growth, trend alignment, or defensive resilience.
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 99
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 98
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 97
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
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)
🟢 69
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 38
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)
🔴 25
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 8
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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 285 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 10 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.
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
—
Operating Margin
-776.0%
Net Margin
-739.4%
EBITDA Margin
-768.6%
ROE
-75.8%
ROA
-63.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.17
Cash
$101.82M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
8.88
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$3.62
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$43,898.74
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
-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% | $-231.22M | $-212.13M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-223.99M | $-188.53M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-221.19M | $-170.80M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-222.58M | $-157.68M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-228.14M | $-148.28M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-243.39M
Terminal Value
$-3.60B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-2.34B
Enterprise Value
$-3.22B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-3.22B
*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
$4,178.96
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$4,178.96
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 7 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
Investing.com · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
The Fly · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 25.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
EyePoint, Inc. (EYPT) 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.
EYPT 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.
EYPT's technical score is 19/100, 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: 8.88; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum; NAV per share: $4,178.96.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -776.0% (negative); Net margin: -739.4% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for EYPT.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 2 purchases and 3 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elston George | Gift | 20.8.2026 | 64,953 | +64,953 | — |
| Elston George | Other Transaction | 20.8.2026 | 96,691 | +5,000 | — |
| Elston George | Other Transaction | 20.8.2026 | 25,000 | -5,000 | — |
| Elston George | Gift | 20.8.2026 | 32,517 | -64,953 | — |
| Elston George | Other Transaction | 20.8.2026 | 5,000 | +5,000 | — |
| Elston George | Gift | 20.8.2026 | 64,953 | +64,953 | — |
| Elston George | Gift | 20.8.2026 | 64,953 | -64,953 | — |
| Elston George | Other Transaction | 20.8.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | — |
| Zaderej Karen L. | Open Market Purchase | 18.8.2026 | 49,100 | +10,600 | $4.93 |
| Zaderej Karen L. | Open Market Purchase | 18.8.2026 | 10,600 | +10,600 | $4.93 |
| Duker Jay S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 10.7.2026 | 8,059 | -8,059 | $14.72 |
| Duker Jay S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.7.2026 | 16,667 | -16,667 | — |
| Duker Jay S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.7.2026 | 16,667 | +16,667 | — |
| Duker Jay S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.7.2026 | 17,653 | +16,667 | — |
| Duker Jay S. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 10.7.2026 | 9,594 | -8,059 | $14.72 |
| Duker Jay S. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.7.2026 | 0 | -16,667 | — |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Open Market Sale | 30.6.2026 | 2,438 | -2,438 | $15.02 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 2,437 | -2,437 | — |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Open Market Sale | 30.6.2026 | 2,437 | -2,437 | $15.00 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 2,438 | +2,438 | $8.26 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 2,438 | -2,438 | — |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 2,437 | +2,437 | $8.26 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 2,437 | +2,437 | $8.26 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 30.6.2026 | 4,875 | +2,438 | $8.26 |
| Ribeiro Ramiro | Open Market Sale | 30.6.2026 | 2,438 | -2,437 | $15.00 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
19,809,561 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 18,110,761 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
48.2% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 38.1% 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