Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$1.36
▲ $0.03 (+2.3%)
Market data updated: 09/25 03:08 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/25/2026
News analyzed: 09/25/2026
Market Cap
$9.06M
Day Range
$1.33 - $1.47
52-Week Range
$0.62 - $12.40
Beta
—
Next Earnings
29.10.2026
Support
$0.62
Resistance
$2.20
FBLG 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.
-87.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/25 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.00
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$6.96 vs. price $1.36 (-611.6%)
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
46
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
5d ago · $1.43
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 24 to -5 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
5d ago · $1.43
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 9 to 34 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
32
Quality
55
Value
38
Momentum
38
Risk
46
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
50
Institutional
100
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 FibroBiologics, Inc. has centered on its patent milestones and clinical progress. The company announced two new U.S. patents—one for using fibroblasts in wound healing (including 3D spheroid applications) and another for treating degenerative disc disease via fibroblast-conditioned media. Additionally, FibroBiologics shipped a third batch of its experimental drug CYWC628 to Australia for a Phase 1/2 diabetic foot ulcer trial, highlighting advancements in its fibroblast-based therapies for chronic conditions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about FibroBiologics, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 7 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 1 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
34
Fundamentals
50
Technical
38
Valuation
38
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, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+65%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
-5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests a dominant overconfidence bias, where price gains outpace fundamentals, while euphoria and FOMO reinforce speculative momentum. The narrative gap (30 points) hints at a disconnect between rosy expectations and slower earnings growth. Key open question: Will traders sustain overconfidence despite the widening gap? Panic selling’s residual presence may signal caution beneath the surface.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 04:59 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"announced that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued U.S. Patent No. 12,721,866, titled 'Therapeutic Use of Fibroblasts for Use in Wound Healing'"
"released the third batch of its CYWC628 drug product and its shipment to Australia in support of the ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial in patients with diabetic foot ulcers"
"received confirmation from The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC informing the Company that it has regained compliance with the bid price requirement"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 13D 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
Jesse Livermore — 20/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two stark camps: those drawn to its momentum and structural resilience versus those flagging extreme risks or insufficient data. Jesse Livermore’s near-perfect score highlights a clear upward price trend that aligns with his technical-driven approach, while Walter Bagehot and Jack Schwager also see merit—liquidity and disciplined setups, respectively—suggesting a solid operational foundation. However, the rest of the methodologies, particularly Benjamin Graham’s variants and Howard Marks, paint a far more cautious picture, with Graham’s defensive criteria and Marks’ risk/valuation warnings signaling potential pitfalls. Even mid-tier thinkers like Thorstein Veblen and Gerald Loeb express reservations about profitability and capital preservation, while the lowest scorers—from Charles Mackay’s crowd psychology concerns to Peter Lynch’s lack of growth data—imply this stock may be a speculative gamble rather than a disciplined pick. The divide reflects a tension between short-term price action and long-term fundamentals or risk tolerance.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
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
🟢 91
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)
🟢 86
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)
🟢 77
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)
🟢 76
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 58
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 53
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 53
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 47
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 43
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 29
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 20
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 284 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (3 bullish · 8 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 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
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-302.9%
ROA
-193.8%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.42
Cash
$4.89M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.61
Debt/Equity
0.00
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$1.36
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$6.96
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-611.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-18.32M | $-16.81M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-19.81M | $-16.67M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-21.05M | $-16.25M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-21.97M | $-15.56M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-22.52M | $-14.64M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-16.66M
Terminal Value
$-355.10M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-230.79M
Enterprise Value
$-310.72M
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-310.72M
*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
$1.85
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 7 positive, 12 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
ACCESS Newswire · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 3.9.2026
PR Newswire · 3.9.2026
Benzinga · 3.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
PR Newswire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
PR Newswire · 27.8.2026
Benzinga · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 27.8.2026
Proactive · 27.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
PR Newswire · 26.8.2026
Benzinga · 26.8.2026
FibroBiologics, Inc. (FBLG) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 46/100, 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.
FBLG currently scores 46/100 (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, FBLG's estimated fair value is -$6.96, which is 611.6% below the current price of $1.36. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
FBLG's technical score is 38/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.00; Current ratio: 3.61; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$6.96 vs. price $1.36 (-611.6%); ATR: 12.0% of price; Calmar: -0.90 (3y annualized return -89.9% / max drawdown 99.9%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for FBLG.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 7 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khoja Hamid | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.9.2026 | 301,571 | +298,508 | $1.68 |
| Khoja Hamid | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.9.2026 | 298,508 | +298,508 | — |
| Link Matthew | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Cilento Richard C. Jr. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Niklas Victoria Ninon Olivia | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Hoffman Robert E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Hoffman Robert E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Link Matthew | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Niklas Victoria Ninon Olivia | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| Cilento Richard C. Jr. | Grant/Award from Employer | 23.6.2026 | 30,803 | +30,803 | — |
| GARCIA RUBEN A | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| O'HEERON PETE | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 92,410 | +92,410 | — |
| Davis Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| Khoja Hamid | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| Davis Jason | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| O'HEERON PETE | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 92,410 | +92,410 | — |
| GARCIA RUBEN A | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| Khoja Hamid | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 61,607 | +61,607 | — |
| O'HEERON PETE | Open Market Purchase | 4.3.2026 | 15,872 | +15,872 | $0.38 |
| Khoja Hamid | Open Market Purchase | 4.3.2026 | 30,000 | +30,000 | $0.38 |
| O'HEERON PETE | Open Market Purchase | 4.3.2026 | 5,958,147 | +15,872 | $0.38 |
| Khoja Hamid | Open Market Purchase | 4.3.2026 | 61,250 | +30,000 | $0.38 |
| O'HEERON PETE | Open Market Purchase | 3.3.2026 | 18,200 | +18,200 | $0.41 |
| O'HEERON PETE | Open Market Purchase | 3.3.2026 | 5,942,275 | +18,200 | $0.41 |
| Davis Jason | Open Market Purchase | 2.3.2026 | 70,000 | +70,000 | $0.41 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
661,912 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 413,742 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 33.4% 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