Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$3.41
▼ $0.10 (-2.8%)
Market data updated: 09/16 07:20 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/16/2026
Market Cap
$229.02M
Day Range
$3.36 - $3.55
52-Week Range
$3.29 - $141.50
Beta
—
Next Earnings
12.11.2026
LIMN 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.
-96.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/25 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
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Return on equity (ROE)
Return on equity (ROE): 104.0% — strong
Fundamental
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$7.90 vs. price $3.41 (-331.6%)
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
42
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
38
Quality
55
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
32
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
53
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 **Liminatus Pharma, Inc.** has focused on two key developments: the company’s strategic partnership with **Synex Consulting Ltd.** to advance its **Phase 1/2a clinical trial** for **IBC101**, a CD19xCD22 bivalent CAR-T therapy targeting relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies, and its **reverse stock split**—approved at a **1-for-50 ratio**—likely aimed at improving liquidity and shareholder confidence. No other substantive details or recurring themes are present in the provided sources.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Liminatus Pharma, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 10 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
35
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
53
Technical
13
Valuation
38
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.
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.
Price (3M)
-42%
Market Narrative
53
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
+1
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for LIMN is dominated by **loss aversion**, as the stock’s steep 3-month drop (-47.7%) and subdued trading volume (0.06x average) signal a reluctance to accelerate downward momentum. While sentiment remains extremely positive (100/100), the lack of volume and negative momentum (-33.7% ROC) dampens FOMO and euphoria, reinforcing defensive positioning. The narrow narrative gap (1 point) suggests no immediate disconnect between perception and reality, but the key question remains: *Will traders accept further losses, or will a catalyst force a re-evaluation?*
Updated: 09/05/2026, 09:34 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Liminatus Pharma Board Adopts Resolutions Approving Reverse Stock Split Of Its Common Stock At Ratio Of 1-For-50"
"Engagement advances clinical execution of IBC101, Liminatus’ CD19xCD22 bivalent CAR-T therapy for relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies"
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 93/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 7/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for LIMN reflects deep methodological contrasts between cyclical, value-driven, and trend-following approaches. Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score (85) suggests the stock aligns with his oversold-cycle principles, while Jesse Livermore’s near-zero score (7) rejects it outright as counter-trend, illustrating how technical momentum and cyclical timing clash. Meanwhile, growth-oriented investors like Thorstein Veblen (67) and Philip Fisher (50) see potential in real value or fundamentals, though Fisher’s verdict is tentative due to data gaps, whereas value purists like Benjamin Graham (50) and Howard Marks (53) flag mixed signals—high expectations or unclear margins. The efficient-market camp (38) dismisses the stock as unexceptional, while risk-averse voices like Walter Bagehot (31) and Gerald Loeb (33) warn of liquidity or capital-preservation risks, underscoring how even moderate scores can mean starkly different warnings.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 93
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)
🟢 80
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
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 67
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
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
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 53
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 50
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: 0%
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 46
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 36
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 33
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 31
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
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)
🔴 7
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 279 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 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
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
104.0%
ROA
-1990.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.43
Cash
—
Total Debt
$1.44M
Current Ratio
0.05
Debt/Equity
-0.15
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$3.41
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$7.90
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-331.6%
🔴 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% | $-10.97M | $-10.07M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-11.87M | $-9.99M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-12.61M | $-9.74M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-13.16M | $-9.32M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-13.49M | $-8.77M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-9.98M
Terminal Value
$-212.69M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-138.24M
Enterprise Value
$-186.11M
Net Debt
$1.44M
Equity Value
$-187.56M
*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
-$0.41
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.41
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 9 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Benzinga · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 24.8.2026
Benzinga · 24.8.2026
MT Newswires · 18.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 18.8.2026
Benzinga · 18.8.2026
ChartMill · 13.8.2026
ChartMill · 13.8.2026
ChartMill · 13.8.2026
Associated Press · 13.8.2026
ChartMill · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
ChartMill · 13.8.2026
Yahoo · 13.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Associated Press · 16.7.2026
MT Newswires · 2.7.2026
Liminatus Pharma, Inc. (LIMN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 42/100, 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.
LIMN currently scores 42/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, LIMN's estimated fair value is -$7.90, which is 331.6% below the current price of $3.41. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
LIMN's technical score is 13/100, 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: Return on equity (ROE): 104.0% — strong; Debt/equity: -0.15; Debt/equity: -0.15.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$7.90 vs. price $3.41 (-331.6%); ATR: 14.7% of price; Current ratio: 0.05.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for LIMN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 4 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valetudo Therapeutics LLC | Other Transaction | 2.7.2026 | 3,448,926 | +3,448,926 | — |
| Valetudo Therapeutics LLC | Other Transaction | 2.7.2026 | 5,244,351 | +3,448,926 | — |
| Valetudo Therapeutics LLC | Other Transaction | 24.6.2026 | 4,373,603 | -4,373,603 | — |
| Valetudo Therapeutics LLC | Other Transaction | 24.6.2026 | 1,795,803 | -4,373,603 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
95,505 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 4,234,144 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
39.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 56.1% 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