Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$21.14
▲ $0.09 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:55 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$1.53B
Day Range
$20.85 - $21.18
52-Week Range
$16.52 - $25.15
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
Support
$20.20
Resistance
$22.68
INVA 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.
+6.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 21/31 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $44.67 vs. price $21.14 (+111.3%)
Fair Value
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
66
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
73
Quality
47
Value
67
Momentum
58
Risk
62
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
83
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 Innoviva, Inc. has focused on its financial performance and strategic positioning. The company reported strong Q2 earnings and revenue, surpassing estimates, while analysts like Cantor Fitzgerald maintained an "Overweight" rating but adjusted its price target downward. Innoviva’s antimicrobial therapies were named finalists for the 2026 Prix Galien USA award, highlighting its specialty therapeutics division. Additionally, discussions centered on its royalty portfolio decline, aggressive share buybacks, and upcoming investor conferences.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Innoviva, Inc.. News trend score: 62. Reason: 5 of the last 19 articles are positive, versus 3 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
12
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
14
Fundamentals
83
Technical
58
Valuation
67
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
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.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-6%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+0
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for INVA suggests a dominant psychological state of **anchoring**, where traders appear to be fixating on the 3.8% distance from resistance. The lack of extreme momentum, volume, or volatility aligns with a measured, cautious approach rather than impulsive behavior. The narrative gap is minimal (-2), indicating no stark disconnect between market perception and fundamentals. The key question is whether traders will break free from this resistance anchor or adjust expectations as price dynamics evolve.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:51 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Innoviva (INVA) reported quarterly ... Sales $119.600M beat $110.985M estimate"
"Cantor Fitzgerald maintains Innoviva (NASDAQ:INVA) with a Overweight rating"
"Innoviva's strategic investments valued at $773 million carry a meaningful impairment risk"
"Antimicrobial Therapies XACDURO®, ZEVTERA® and NUZOLVENCE® designated Finalists for 2026 Prix Galien USA"
📈 15D 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 — 31/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among historical methodologies, with scores ranging from near-perfect liquidity and defensive value signals to outright rejection as a speculative or overbought bet. The top-tier investors—Bagehot, Graham, and Mackay—see it as a resilient, low-risk opportunity, emphasizing financial strength and the absence of crowd-driven hype. Meanwhile, growth-focused thinkers like Lynch and Fisher split sharply: Lynch sees untapped upside in its growth trajectory, while Fisher dismisses it for lacking the deep qualitative edge he prized. The middle ground, represented by Marks and Housel, acknowledges reasonable risk-reward but warns against overconfidence, while cycle-sensitive voices like Nelson and Livermore flag potential overvaluation or trend resistance. The extreme contrast—from a 100 to a 27—reflects whether the model prioritizes stability, growth potential, or trend alignment, with no clear consensus on whether this stock is a defensive anchor or a speculative gamble.
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 97
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 91
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 83
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 81
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 78
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 76
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 68
The kind of quiet compounder a patient holder could actually stick with
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 60
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 56
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 46
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 44
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 42
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 31
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 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (6 bullish · 3 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.
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
74.8%
Operating Margin
39.8%
Net Margin
65.9%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
23.1%
ROA
16.6%
ROIC
—
EPS
$4.02
Cash
$550.94M
Total Debt
$257.73M
Current Ratio
14.64
Debt/Equity
0.22
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$21.14
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$44.67
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
+111.3%
🟢 Appears cheap relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
8.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.0% | $211.40M | $193.95M |
| 2 | 6.6% | $225.36M | $189.68M |
| 3 | 5.2% | $237.16M | $183.13M |
| 4 | 3.9% | $246.33M | $174.51M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $252.49M | $164.10M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$195.80M
Terminal Value
$3.98B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$2.59B
Enterprise Value
$3.49B
Net Debt
$-293.21M
Equity Value
$3.79B
*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
$15.71
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$12.52
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 5 positive, 11 neutral, 3 negative out of the last 19 articles.
ChartMill · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Business Wire · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.8.2026
Business Wire · 11.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
Zacks · 6.8.2026
Associated Press · 5.8.2026
Business Wire · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
ChartMill · 28.7.2026
Insider Monkey · 1.7.2026
Insider Monkey · 25.6.2026
Insider Monkey · 23.6.2026
Business Wire · 18.6.2026
MT Newswires · 16.6.2026
Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 66/100, 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.
INVA currently scores 66/100 (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, INVA's estimated fair value is $44.67, which is 111.3% above the current price of $21.14. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
INVA's technical score is 58/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: $44.67 vs. price $21.14 (+111.3%); Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 816.7%; Net income growth: 1059.2%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for INVA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhen Marianne | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 56,389 | -1,127 | $21.00 |
| Raifeld Pavel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 284,799 | -1,130 | $21.00 |
| Basso Stephen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 88,013 | -558 | $21.00 |
| Raifeld Pavel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 1,130 | -1,130 | $21.00 |
| Basso Stephen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 558 | -558 | $21.00 |
| Zhen Marianne | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.8.2026 | 1,127 | -1,127 | $21.00 |
| Zhen Marianne | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 1,127 | -1,127 | $22.24 |
| Raifeld Pavel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 1,130 | -1,130 | $22.24 |
| Basso Stephen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 559 | -559 | $22.24 |
| Zhen Marianne | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 57,516 | -1,127 | $22.24 |
| Raifeld Pavel | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 285,929 | -1,130 | $22.24 |
| Basso Stephen | Tax Withholding in Shares | 20.5.2026 | 88,571 | -559 | $22.24 |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 5,733 | +5,733 | — |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 9,461 | +9,461 | — |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 9,166 | +9,166 | — |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 5,733 | +5,733 | — |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 15,194 | +9,461 | — |
| Linden Josephine | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.5.2026 | 9,166 | +9,166 | — |
| Raifeld Pavel | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 1,123 | +1,123 | — |
| Basso Stephen | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 1,123 | +1,123 | — |
| Raifeld Pavel | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 287,059 | +1,123 | — |
| Basso Stephen | Grant/Award from Employer | 15.5.2026 | 89,130 | +1,123 | — |
| Small Derek A | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 9,786 | +9,786 | — |
| Haimovitz Jules | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | — |
| Zhen Marianne | Grant/Award from Employer | 4.5.2026 | 12,766 | +12,766 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,940,337 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 6,892,081 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 47.3% 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