Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$2.61
▲ $0.01 (+0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/29 04:29 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/28/2026
News analyzed: 09/29/2026
Market Cap
$286.51M
Day Range
$2.51 - $2.62
52-Week Range
$2.51 - $5.45
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$2.57
Resistance
$3.99
RCKT 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.
-18.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 8/25 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
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Daily volatility (ATR)
ATR: 9.0% of price
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
47
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
68
Quality
55
Value
50
Momentum
10
Risk
46
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
50
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.
Recent media coverage of Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has centered on its financial performance and strategic updates. The company reported a Q2 earnings miss, with adjusted EPS at $(0.37), despite a year-over-year improvement, while analysts highlighted progress in its Kresladi launch and PKP2-ACM program. Investment firms like Wedbush maintained an Outperform rating but slightly lowered their price target to $15. Additionally, Rocket announced participation in major investor conferences in September, reinforcing its focus on commercial-stage genetic medicines for rare cardiovascular disorders.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 10 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 4 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
45
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
52
Psychology
81
Fundamentals
50
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.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
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)
-20%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
52
Narrative Gap
-5
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
RCKT’s psychology is dominated by euphoria (26) and anchoring (33), with FOMO (36) and overconfidence (14) as secondary forces. The stock’s momentum (+5.8% ROC), strong sentiment (86/100), and 13.1% above its 200-day average reflect a speculative, optimistic mindset. Anchoring near resistance (3.4%) may limit profit-taking, while overconfidence—price outpacing EPS growth—suggests traders overvalue recent gains. The narrative gap (15 points) hints at a disconnect between market enthusiasm and fundamentals. The key question: *Will traders extend positions despite proximity to resistance, or will anchoring trigger caution?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 10:41 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"positive clinical safety update regarding the initial three patients treated under the modified protocol for its global, pivotal Phase 2 trial of RP-A501 in Danon disease"
"Kresladi Launch in Focus"
"Wedbush Adjusts PT on Rocket Pharmaceuticals to $15 From $16, Keeps Outperform Rating"
"reported quarterly losses of $(0.37) per share which missed the analyst consensus estimate of $0.24 by 254.17 percent"
📈 6D 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
Benjamin Graham — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Thorstein Veblen — 13/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock’s starkly divided verdicts reflect deep contrasts in methodology priorities. Benjamin Graham’s defensive approach scores it highly (84) for its perceived liquidity and margin of safety, aligning with his focus on undervaluation and risk mitigation, while his enterprising counterpart (61) finds it lacking the deep bargain appeal of a true ‘net-net’ opportunity. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch’s near-perfect score (88) is tempered by his own admission of insufficient growth data—suggesting the stock’s fundamentals may not yet meet his ‘ten times earnings’ or ‘story’ criteria, despite its technical robustness. On the opposite end, the lowest scorers—Thorstein Veblen (13) and Samuel Nelson (12)—warn of speculative excess and overbought cycles, critiquing what they see as growth pursued for its own sake or a stretched valuation. Even risk-averse voices like Gerald Loeb (39) and Howard Marks (37) flag the stock’s volatility and valuation as red flags, while trend-followers like Jesse Livermore (65) and Jack Schwager (38) dismiss it for lack of clear directional momentum. The divide underscores whether the stock’s liquidity and defensive traits (Graham) outweigh its speculative or cyclical risks (Veblen, Nelson, Loeb).
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 91
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 81
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 79
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)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 62
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 60
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)
🟡 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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 57
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 53
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 46
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 39
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: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 15
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
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 13
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
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
Based on the last 285 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
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-80.5%
ROA
-67.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$2.01
Cash
$77.56M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
6.38
Debt/Equity
0.08
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$2.61
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$31.97
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
⚠️ Extreme
Model output is extreme — likely a data/model limitation for this stock, not a reliable fair-value read.
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% | $-209.50M | $-192.20M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-226.52M | $-190.66M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-240.68M | $-185.85M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-251.21M | $-177.96M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-257.49M | $-167.35M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-190.45M
Terminal Value
$-4.06B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-2.64B
Enterprise Value
$-3.55B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-3.55B
*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
$2.56
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$2.33
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 6 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Insider Monkey · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
BioPharma Dive · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
MT Newswires · 16.9.2026
Zacks · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
The Fly · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Stocktwits · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
MT Newswires · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
InvestorsHub · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RCKT) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 47/100, 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.
RCKT currently scores 47/100 (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.
RCKT'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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.4%; Debt/equity: 0.08; Current ratio: 6.38.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: ATR: 9.0% of price; Calmar: -0.54 (3y annualized return -49.9% / max drawdown 92.7%); Return on equity (ROE): -80.5% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for RCKT.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 11.9.2026 | 598,489 | -75,364 | $3.40 |
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 11.9.2026 | 75,364 | -75,364 | $3.40 |
| Shah Gaurav | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 1,056,594 | -2,293 | $3.38 |
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 673,853 | -631 | $3.38 |
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 631 | -631 | $3.38 |
| Shah Gaurav | Open Market Sale | 18.8.2026 | 2,293 | -2,293 | $3.38 |
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 674,484 | -3,493 | $3.38 |
| Shah Gaurav | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 1,058,887 | -2,837 | $3.38 |
| Shah Gaurav | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 2,837 | -2,837 | $3.38 |
| Wilson Martin | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 3,493 | -3,493 | $3.38 |
| Stevens Christopher James | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 36,658 | -36,658 | $3.50 |
| Chaudhuri Sarbani | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 4,701 | -4,701 | $3.50 |
| Stevens Christopher James | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 505,784 | -36,658 | $3.50 |
| Chaudhuri Sarbani | Open Market Sale | 11.8.2026 | 262,809 | -4,701 | $3.50 |
| Stevens Christopher James | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 101,428 | +101,428 | — |
| Stevens Christopher James | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 73,313 | +73,313 | — |
| SOUTHWELL DAVID P | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 150,000 | +150,000 | — |
| SOUTHWELL DAVID P | Other Transaction | 3.8.2026 | 204,522 | +150,000 | — |
| Stevens Christopher James | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 542,442 | +73,313 | — |
| Stevens Christopher James | Grant/Award from Employer | 3.8.2026 | 101,428 | +101,428 | — |
| Dolsten Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 64,860 | +64,860 | — |
| BOESS CARSTEN | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 64,860 | +64,860 | — |
| SOUTHWELL DAVID P | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 22,862 | +22,862 | — |
| Fong Peter | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 64,860 | +64,860 | — |
| Dolsten Mikael | Grant/Award from Employer | 18.6.2026 | 22,862 | +22,862 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
14,847,478 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 14,711,952 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 56.2% 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