Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$1.00
▼ $0.06 (-5.7%)
Market data updated: 09/15 04:26 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/15/2026
News analyzed: 09/15/2026
Market Cap
$339.11M
Day Range
$0.99 - $1.06
52-Week Range
$0.99 - $2.73
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
OCGN 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.
-16.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/26 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
Insiders
🟡 Mixed
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is stable or improving over time
Quality
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -1425.7% (negative)
Fundamental
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
40
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
40
Quality
63
Value
50
Momentum
10
Risk
40
Sentiment
74
Fundamental
42
Institutional
50
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.
Recent media coverage of Ocugen, Inc. has primarily focused on its progress with **OCU410**, a gene therapy for geographic atrophy linked to dry age-related macular degeneration. Key developments include the **FDA clearance for a Phase III trial** and the **first patient dosing** in this pivotal study, signaling advancement toward potential regulatory approval. The company also highlighted plans for **2027 BLA filings** while noting rising research and development costs in Q2 earnings, which slightly missed estimates. Investor and industry conferences were also scheduled to discuss its pipeline.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Ocugen, Inc.. News trend score: 74. Reason: 6 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
55
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
38
Psychology
82
Fundamentals
42
Technical
10
Valuation
50
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.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price (3M)
-19%
Market Narrative
42
Fundamental Reality
38
Narrative Gap
+4
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
OCGN’s psychology profile suggests a **neutral-to-cautious sentiment** with no dominant bias, as all states hover near baseline. The absence of extreme momentum (-8.1% ROC) or volatility (0.94x ATR) implies neither panic nor FOMO dominates, while peer underperformance (+0.7% vs. -1.9%) rules out herd behavior. The narrow narrative gap (-1) hints at a balanced perception of reality. The key question: *Is the mild volume spike (1.02x) a reaction to new information or residual noise?*
Updated: 09/07/2026, 05:26 PM
👥 What the crowd believes
"Ocugen announces first patient dosed in Phase 3 registrational trial of OCU410 for geographic atrophy (Article 3)."
"Ocugen targets 2027 BLA filings as gene therapy programs near key readouts (Article 5)."
"Ocugen's Q2 earnings miss estimates as R&D costs rise (Article 7)."
"FDA clearance for OCU410 Phase 3 trial announced (Article 9)."
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 — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jesse Livermore — 22/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for OCGN reflects deep contrasts in methodology priorities. Charles Mackay’s near-perfect score suggests the stock avoids crowd-driven mania, aligning with his focus on avoiding speculative bubbles, while Howard Marks’ slightly lower but still favorable scores indicate it’s neither overpriced nor in a late-cycle trap—his nuanced risk assessment contrasts sharply with Philip Fisher’s and Jack Schwager’s outright rejection, both of whom demand clear, high-quality growth or disciplined setups that OCGN lacks. Meanwhile, Benjamin Graham’s mixed verdict and his Enterprising Investor variant’s low score highlight valuation uncertainties, whereas Peter Lynch’s caution signals that while growth exists, it’s already priced in—mirroring Thorstein Veblen’s skepticism about whether growth translates to sustainable profit. At the other extreme, Jesse Livermore’s extreme negative score underscores a clear trend-based rejection, while Walter Bagehot’s liquidity concerns and Morgan Housel’s volatility warning reflect systemic risks that patient or contrarian investors might overlook.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 100
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)
🟢 86
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 83
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟢 76
A real, disciplined setup with favorable reward/risk
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 66
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 64
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
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 59
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
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 52
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 45
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 44
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 41
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)
🟡 37
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 31
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 31
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 (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 26
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 22
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 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.
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
—
Operating Margin
-1425.7%
Net Margin
-1537.4%
EBITDA Margin
-1425.7%
ROE
557.7%
ROA
-155.9%
ROIC
—
EPS
—
Cash
$18.89M
Total Debt
$28.79M
Current Ratio
1.06
Debt/Equity
-2.37
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
—
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
—
Not enough data to compute signals.
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 6 positive, 12 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 2.9.2026
MT Newswires · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 25.8.2026
MarketBeat · 16.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
Zacks · 7.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 6.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
ChartMill · 6.8.2026
Ocugen, Inc. (OCGN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 40/100, 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.
OCGN currently scores 40/100 (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.
OCGN's technical score is 10/100, 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: Operating margin is stable or improving over time; Return on equity (ROE): 557.7% — strong; Debt/equity: -2.37.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -1425.7% (negative); Net margin: -1537.4% (negative); ATR: 7.7% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for OCGN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 2 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Musunuri Shankar | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 57,264 | -57,264 | $1.12 |
| Musunuri Shankar | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 468,727 | -468,727 | $1.12 |
| Johnson-Greene Treerita Essalima | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 21,000 | +21,000 | $1.23 |
| Johnson-Greene Treerita Essalima | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2026 | 521,000 | +21,000 | $1.23 |
| Coleman Blaise | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Castillo Kirsten | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Kompella Uday | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Chandrasekhar Satishchandran | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Coleman Blaise | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Castillo Kirsten | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Chandrasekhar Satishchandran | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Kompella Uday | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 170,100 | +170,100 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 112,205 | -112,205 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 112,205 | +112,205 | $0.46 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 15,000 | +15,000 | $0.51 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 66,929 | -66,929 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 15,000 | -15,000 | — |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 66,929 | +66,929 | $1.42 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 1,180,182 | +15,000 | $0.51 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 1,292,387 | +112,205 | $0.46 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 1,359,316 | +66,929 | $1.42 |
| Zhang Junge | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 1.4.2026 | 0 | -66,929 | — |
| Ramachandran Ramesh | Grant/Award from Employer | 2.1.2026 | 310,950 | +310,950 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
98,309,421 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 100,913,607 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
70.1% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.6% 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