Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$301.52
▲ $2.48 (+0.8%)
Market data updated: 09/27 02:55 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/27/2026
News analyzed: 09/27/2026
Market Cap
$6.01B
Day Range
$293.90 - $305.35
52-Week Range
$166.10 - $326.63
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$270.77
Resistance
$317.49
LGND 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.
+80.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 16/28 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
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 60.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $53.54 vs. price $301.52 (-82.2%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
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
63
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
today · $301.52
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 14 to 39 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
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
68
Quality
42
Value
33
Momentum
78
Risk
64
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
66
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.
Everyone's writing about Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. News trend score: 74. Reason: 9 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
42
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
66
Technical
78
Valuation
33
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
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 stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-1%
Market Narrative
72
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+34
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 3D 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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on their documented principles, the model estimates that Walter Bagehot and Peter Lynch view LGND favorably, awarding high scores of 100 and 88 respectively because of strong liquidity and growth potential. In contrast, Benjamin Graham and Howard Marks assign low scores (18 and 35) as the stock fails defensive cheapness criteria and presents risk/valuation concerns that trigger caution. Mid‑range scores (54‑62) from investors such as Gerald Loeb, Samuel Nelson, and the behavioral analysts Mackay, Veblen, and Schwager highlight mixed signals, indicating moderate risk and uncertainty about translating growth into profit. Overall, the divergent verdicts arise because each methodology weighs liquidity, growth, valuation, and cycle position differently, producing a wide spectrum of estimates from strong buy‑like to caution‑like stances.
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)
🟢 88
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 65
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
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)
🟡 57
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 54
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 53
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 40
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 38
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
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
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
🔴 31
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 25
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 24
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 19
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 18
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 7
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 286 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 2 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 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
15.3%
Net Margin
46.4%
EBITDA Margin
27.9%
ROE
12.2%
ROA
8.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$6.44
Cash
$174.93M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
22.23
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$301.52
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$53.54
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-82.2%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
18.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 18.2% | $57.81M | $53.03M |
| 2 | 14.3% | $66.06M | $55.60M |
| 3 | 10.3% | $72.89M | $56.29M |
| 4 | 6.4% | $77.58M | $54.96M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $79.52M | $51.68M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$48.91M
Terminal Value
$1.25B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$814.96M
Enterprise Value
$1.09B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$1.09B
*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
$50.12
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$34.01
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 6 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 25.9.2026
Benzinga · 25.9.2026
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 21.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 4.9.2026
Benzinga · 2.9.2026
MarketBeat · 26.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 26.8.2026
Benzinga · 21.8.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 14.8.2026
Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (LGND) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 63/100, 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.
LGND currently scores 63/100 (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, LGND's estimated fair value is $53.54, which is 82.2% below the current price of $301.52. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
LGND's technical score is 78/100, which currently reads as bullish — 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: Revenue growth (last year): 60.4%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 2886.4%; Net income growth: 3186.6%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $53.54 vs. price $301.52 (-82.2%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Free cash flow growth: -48.6%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for LGND.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 14 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zimmermann Martine | Tax Withholding in Shares | 22.9.2026 | 3,782 | -115 | $298.50 |
| Zimmermann Martine | Open Market Sale | 10.9.2026 | 3,897 | -1,200 | $285.00 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 36,514 | -400 | $288.98 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 39,414 | -1,800 | $285.17 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 41,214 | -300 | $283.99 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 37,299 | -2,115 | $286.36 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 36,914 | -385 | $287.53 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 2,115 | -2,115 | $286.36 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 300 | -300 | $283.99 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 385 | -385 | $287.53 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 1,800 | -1,800 | $285.17 |
| Reardon Andrew | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 400 | -400 | $288.98 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 45,949 | +2,074 | $70.04 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 59,337 | +3,348 | $68.74 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 48,818 | +2,869 | $55.75 |
| Haas Jason | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 0 | -6,138 | — |
| Haas Jason | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 3,981 | -7,138 | $292.81 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 43,875 | +16,179 | $52.84 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 27,696 | -31,641 | $292.07 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 55,989 | +7,171 | $57.22 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 0 | -2,869 | — |
| Haas Jason | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 11,119 | +6,138 | $51.56 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 31,641 | -31,641 | $292.07 |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 2,869 | -2,869 | — |
| Espinoza Octavio | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 12.8.2026 | 3,348 | -3,348 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,632,434 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 2,480,981 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
66.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 74.7% 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