Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$44.78
▲ $1.45 (+3.3%)
Market data updated: 09/22 07:12 AM
News analyzed: 09/22/2026
Market Cap
$9.71B
Day Range
$43.99 - $44.82
52-Week Range
$32.53 - $57.82
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$39.36
Resistance
$45.53
QGEN 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.
-2.5% (1Y)
⚠️ Insufficient data for a reliable StockIQ Score
Only 3 of 7 categories available — Fundamental, Growth, Valuation, Quality unavailable.
Strengths: 8/14 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
🟢 Bullish
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Price vs. SMA 50
Price is above the 50-day average
Technical
Biggest negative driver
Calmar Ratio (return vs. drawdown)
Calmar: 0.08 (3y annualized return 3.3% / max drawdown 41.4%)
Risk
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
76
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
No data available
Quality
No data available
Value
No data available
Momentum
77
Risk
42
Sentiment
92
Fundamental
No data available
Institutional
100
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 Qiagen N.V. has centered on its strong second-quarter 2026 financial performance, where the company surpassed analyst earnings estimates and reaffirmed its full-year outlook, despite a modest stock dip. Investor attention also focused on its new QIAsymphony Connect automated nucleic acid extraction platform, which received FDA and EUDAMED approval, alongside a leadership transition with Jon Pratt assuming CEO role. The company’s growth in high-throughput diagnostics and its position in expanding markets like multiplex assays and plant virome diagnostics were also highlighted.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Qiagen N.V. Common. News trend score: 92. Reason: 9 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
28
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
67
Fundamentals
—
Technical
77
Valuation
—
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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)
+20%
Market Narrative
62
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peers despite QGEN’s relative resilience. The narrative-reality gap (58 vs. 50) hints at overestimation of fundamentals, while euphoria persists due to perfect sentiment despite weak momentum. Anchoring near support may limit downside, but the lack of volume or volatility signals weak conviction. The key question: *Will herding sustain if peers falter further?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:14 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Qiagen (QGEN) has drawn fresh attention after Q2 2026 adjusted earnings and net sales came in above consensus"
"Qiagen launched QIAsymphony Connect, an IVD-compliant automated nucleic acid extraction platform with FDA and EUDAMED listings"
"The global multiplex assays market is projected to grow from US$6.8 billion in 2025 to US$12.4 billion by 2030"
"Qiagen announced a CEO transition to Jon Pratt from September 1"
📈 7D 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
Thorstein Veblen — 80/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for QGEN reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors assess stocks. Samuel Armstrong Nelson and Thorstein Veblen’s high scores (85 and 80) suggest they see strong cyclical positioning and growth potential, respectively—both principles that favor stocks with momentum or value-creation traits. Meanwhile, the majority of methodologies—particularly those requiring robust data (Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Bagehot) or emphasizing market efficiency (Malkiel/Bogle)—score poorly due to insufficient fundamentals or weak evidence for active picking. Even the cautionary voices like Marks, Livermore, and Schwager flag red flags (risk, trend resistance, or lack of setup), while the late-cycle warning from Marks (Market Cycle) contrasts sharply with Nelson’s bullish cyclical read. The debate hinges on whether QGEN’s speculative or speculative-growth traits align with disciplined value (Nelson/Veblen) or are better avoided due to data gaps, volatility, or structural risks.
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 80
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: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 71
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 58
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 51
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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%
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%
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 46
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 42
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)
🟡 41
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 16
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 9
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 283 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (8 bullish · 3 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 uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low 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.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 7.7.2026 | $0.350 |
| 6.7.2026 | $0.350 |
| 2.7.2025 | $0.250 |
| 1.7.2025 | $0.250 |
| 30.1.2024 | $1.358 |
| 29.1.2024 | $1.358 |
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 9 positive, 9 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 16.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Trefis · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 5.9.2026
Simply Wall St. · 5.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
StockIQ doesn't currently have enough real data to compute a reliable score for Qiagen N.V. Common (QGEN) — 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 QGEN 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.
QGEN's technical score is 77/100, 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: Price is above the 50-day average; Price is above the 200-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Calmar: 0.08 (3y annualized return 3.3% / max drawdown 41.4%); CMF 20 days: -0.18; %K 95.6 — overbought.
Yes — QGEN 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 — 10 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 14 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 26.10.2017 | 753,012 | +753,012 | — |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 15.6.2007 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $1.35 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 12.6.2007 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $1.29 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 4.6.2007 | 50,000 | +50,000 | $1.31 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 31.5.2007 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $1.31 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 30.5.2007 | 30,000 | +30,000 | $1.31 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 29.5.2007 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $1.31 |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 23.5.2007 | 17,500 | +17,500 | $1.29 |
| QIAGEN NV | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 9.5.2007 | 240,000 | +240,000 | $0.45 |
| QIAGEN NV | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 9.5.2007 | 240,000 | -240,000 | — |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 8.5.2007 | 240,000 | +240,000 | $0.65 |
| QIAGEN NV | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 30.4.2007 | 340,000 | -340,000 | — |
| QIAGEN NV | Open Market Purchase | 30.4.2007 | 340,000 | +340,000 | $0.65 |
| QIAGEN NV | Option Exercise (in-the-money) | 30.4.2007 | 340,000 | +340,000 | $0.45 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
7,509,104 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 8,232,939 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
54.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 59.7% 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