Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$1.76
▼ $0.02 (-1.1%)
Market data updated: 09/19 02:19 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$76.81M
Day Range
$1.75 - $1.81
52-Week Range
$1.53 - $4.34
Beta
—
Next Earnings
10.11.2026
Support
$1.59
Resistance
$2.37
GANX 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.
+3.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 7/24 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 31.5%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
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
50
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
60
Quality
47
Value
50
Momentum
26
Risk
46
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
50
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Gain Therapeutics, Inc. has centered on its clinical-stage biotech advancements, particularly the FDA approval to advance its lead candidate, **GT-02287**, into a Phase 2 trial for Parkinson’s disease. Analysts, including HC Wainwright’s Raghuram Selvaraju, have maintained a **Buy rating** with an $8 price target, while the company reported improved Q2 2026 earnings, beating loss estimates. Leadership updates—such as naming **Joanne Taylor as CSO** and **Terenzio Ignoni as COO**—and CEO Gene Mack’s shareholder letter also highlighted operational progress. The company’s focus on **allosteric small-molecule therapies** remains a recurring theme.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Gain Therapeutics, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 14 of the last 15 articles are positive, versus 0 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
17
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
49
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
50
Technical
26
Valuation
50
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
-6%
Market Narrative
64
Fundamental Reality
49
Narrative Gap
+15
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
GANX’s psychology is fragmented, with no dominant state despite extreme positive sentiment (100/100). The disconnect between euphoric news and weak momentum (-8.3% ROC) suggests a speculative bubble forming without fundamental validation. Herding is absent, and overconfidence is undermined by price underperforming EPS growth. The key question: *Is the narrative (54) detached from reality (49) due to hype, or will fundamentals reassert themselves?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 05:03 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Gain Therapeutics Gets US FDA Approval to Advance GT-02287 Into Phase 2 Study for Parkinson's Disease"
"HC Wainwright & Co. reiterates Gain Therapeutics (NASDAQ:GANX) with a Buy and maintains $8 price target"
"Gain Therapeutics Names Joanne Taylor Chief Scientific Officer, Terenzio Ignoni as COO"
"Gain Therapeutics Q2 EPS $(0.11) Beats $(0.14) Estimate"
📈 9D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 14/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The methodologies diverge sharply on GANX, with some models seeing it as a resilient or growth-oriented opportunity while others flag significant concerns. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights its liquidity resilience, suggesting it could weather financial stress, while Samuel Nelson and Peter Lynch both lean bullish, emphasizing oversold conditions and undervalued growth potential. However, value-focused investors like Benjamin Graham and Howard Marks express caution, questioning whether the stock’s valuation justifies its perceived strength or if expectations are already inflated. On the opposite end, trend-followers like Jesse Livermore and Philip Fisher dismiss it outright—Livermore sees it as counter-trend, and Fisher lacks sufficient fundamentals to justify a long-term hold. The middle-ground approaches, from Malkiel/Bogle’s skepticism to Morgan Housel’s pragmatic moderation, reflect uncertainty, while Thorstein Veblen’s low score hints at speculative overreach. The debate thus pits liquidity/cycle optimism against valuation skepticism and trend resistance.
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 79
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 67
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 60
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 58
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
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 48
No clear edge either way
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 32
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 25
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 14
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 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 7 bearish · 2 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
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-108.6%
ROA
-88.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.61
Cash
$20.84M
Total Debt
$400.95K
Current Ratio
6.63
Debt/Equity
0.02
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$0.56
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.56
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 14 positive, 1 neutral, 0 negative out of the last 15 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 31.8.2026
Yahoo · 25.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 25.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 11.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
MT Newswires · 16.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 16.7.2026
Stocktwits · 29.6.2026
MT Newswires · 29.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 29.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 10.6.2026
Simply Wall St. · 27.5.2026
GlobeNewswire · 26.5.2026
Simply Wall St. · 22.5.2026
Gain Therapeutics, Inc. (GANX) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 50/100, 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.
GANX currently scores 50/100 (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.
GANX's technical score is 26/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 31.5%; Debt/equity: 0.02; Current ratio: 6.63.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; ATR: 4.9% of price; Calmar: -0.25 (3y annualized return -20.3% / max drawdown 81.4%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for GANX.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 23 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Melincoff Gwen A | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| HASLER HANS PETER | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Riley Jeffrey Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Nicaise Claude | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| GOLDSTEIN DOV A MD | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Islam Khalid | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| GOLDSTEIN DOV A MD | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| HASLER HANS PETER | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Riley Jeffrey Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Melincoff Gwen A | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Nicaise Claude | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Islam Khalid | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.7.2026 | 25,000 | +25,000 | — |
| Mack Gene | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.3.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Fuggetta Gianluca | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.3.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Mack Gene | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.3.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | — |
| Fuggetta Gianluca | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.3.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| RICHMAN ERIC I | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Islam Khalid | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| GOLDSTEIN DOV A MD | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| HASLER HANS PETER | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Melincoff Gwen A | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Nicaise Claude | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
| Riley Jeffrey Scott | Grant/Award from Employer | 24.6.2025 | 15,000 | +15,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,795,819 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,213,359 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 63.0% 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