Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· · OTC
$66.28
▲ $0.24 (+0.4%)
Market data updated: 09/18 05:34 PM
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$66.02 - $66.57
52-Week Range
$58.53 - $74.36
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.01.2027
-4.4% (1Y)
🟡 Moderate
Strengths: 2/13 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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 1.9% of price
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.41 (3y annualized return 11.9% / max drawdown 29.4%)
Risk
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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
43
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
20d ago · $72.00
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
20d ago · $72.00
Evidence: 1.8x recent average volume
What happened after
20d ago · $72.00
Evidence: 10 bullish / 0 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
21d ago · $73.00
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
21d ago · $73.00
Evidence: 1.7x recent average volume
What happened after
21d ago · $73.00
Evidence: 10 bullish / 0 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
23d ago · $72.89
Evidence: attention score 65/100
What happened after
23d ago · $74.07
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
23d ago · $74.07
Evidence: 1.6x recent average volume
What happened after
23d ago · $74.07
Evidence: 10 bullish / 1 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
🐂🐻 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.
🕰️ StockIQ Time Machine
What did StockIQ know — and when? Pick a date from the real accumulated history.
As of August 27, 2026
Then
81
$72.96
Now
43
$66.28
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
26
Risk
50
Sentiment
80
Fundamental
No data available
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.
The provided sources do not mention Lonza Group AG at all, so no recent media coverage about the company can be summarized. The headlines focus on unrelated topics, including pharmaceutical trials, real estate, technology patents, retail, and financial market trends.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Lonza Group AG. News trend score: 80. Reason: 6 of the last 16 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
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
64
Fundamentals
—
Technical
26
Valuation
—
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.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+8%
Market Narrative
48
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-2
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for LZAGY suggests a **tentative anchoring bias**, as the stock remains 4.2% above key support, while **panic selling** and **euphoria** scores are elevated but lack strong momentum or volume confirmation. The narrow narrative-reality gap (-1) implies a balanced but cautious sentiment, with traders possibly debating whether to hold or exit near support. The key question is whether the slight overvaluation (+2.8% above 200-day avg) will sustain or if a break below support could trigger further selling. The lack of extreme volume or volatility suggests a measured, not panicked, response.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 08:33 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Monod Bio licensed AI-designed protein technologies to SignalChem Biotech for custom discovery assays"
📈 12D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (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 — 28/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with Samuel Armstrong Nelson’s high score (93) standing out as an outlier, suggesting a cyclical opportunity near an oversold trough—likely due to his focus on market timing and momentum. In contrast, the majority of strategies—including Graham, Fisher, Lynch, and Bagehot—score at the midpoint (50), either due to insufficient data or mixed signals, reflecting their reliance on deep fundamental or balance-sheet analysis, which may not be available or conclusive here. Meanwhile, Jack Schwager (39) and Jesse Livermore (34) reject it outright, aligning with their trend-following and contrarian principles, while Howard Marks (52) and Gerald Loeb (59) temper enthusiasm, warning of potential overvaluation or moderate risk. The divergence underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in technical or cyclical patterns (Nelson, Mackay) or whether its fundamentals are too murky or already priced in for traditional value or growth investors.
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 79
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 71
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 60
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)
🟡 57
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 54
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)
🟡 54
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet/valuation data for a real Graham read
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
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%
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 50
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 50
Not enough balance-sheet data for a real Bagehot read
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 0%
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 50
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 50
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: 0%
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 50
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)
🟡 48
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 28
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 269 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 8 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$64.85
Range Bottom
$74.36
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 13.5.2026 | $0.637 |
| 14.5.2025 | $0.478 |
| 15.5.2024 | $0.442 |
| 9.5.2023 | $0.378 |
| 9.5.2022 | $0.313 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 9 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 16 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
PR Newswire · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
Just Style · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
MT Newswires · 26.8.2026
PR Newswire · 26.8.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 26.8.2026
Zacks · 26.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
Zacks · 9.7.2026
PR Newswire · 8.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 25.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 24.6.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Lonza Group AG (LZAGY) — only 3 of 7 categories are available right now. Rather than show a misleading number, this page shows which data is missing instead.
StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — and for LZAGY specifically, there currently isn't enough real data (only 3 of 7 categories available) to state even a factual score reliably. Check back once more data is available.
LZAGY'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: ATR: 1.9% of price; +5.0% over the last 3 months relative to the index.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.41 (3y annualized return 11.9% / max drawdown 29.4%); Price is below the 50-day average; Price is below the 200-day average.
Yes — LZAGY has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 0 filings.
No recent insider transaction filings found for this stock.
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
77,702 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 16,610 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
32.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 39.1% 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