Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$784.85
▼ $4.60 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/19 03:48 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$73.74B
Day Range
$779.65 - $794.73
52-Week Range
$541.00 - $859.34
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$637.80
Resistance
$859.34
REGN 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.
+31.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 12/28 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
🟡 Mixed
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.06
Risk
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin stability
Operating margin is eroding over time
Quality
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
88/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
91/100
Analog Quality
-4.0%
Median 40D Outcome
66/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
40%
+1.7% … +4.3%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.7% … -0.7%
🔴 Bearish
53%
-11.9% … -4.0%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 40 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 40% (95% CI 20%–64%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -1.0%.
Echo #1 — Oversold Reversal
1 occurrence(s) · 100% historical success
Echo #2 — Trend Acceleration
3 occurrence(s) · 33% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 33% (15%–58%) | -0.7% | -2.6% … +1.3% | +0.2% |
| 10D | 33% (15%–58%) | +0.1% | -4.3% … +1.6% | +0.2% |
| 20D | 40% (20%–64%) | -1.0% | -10.6% … +1.9% | +0.9% |
| 40D | 27% (11%–52%) | -4.0% | -8.0% … +1.4% | +0.6% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -5.4% | -16.6% … +5.5% | +0.7% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-27 | 88/100 | Consolidation | -13.1% | -20.5% |
| 2021-09-24 | 83/100 | Consolidation | -10.4% | -5.6% |
| 2023-05-15 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +2.2% | +5.6% |
| 2026-01-29 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +4.3% | -0.7% |
| 2026-04-20 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -16.0% | -9.4% |
| 2026-03-17 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -0.7% | -19.4% |
| 2023-02-16 | 80/100 | Consolidation | +1.5% | +2.0% |
| 2020-08-13 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -10.8% | -5.4% |
| 2019-02-13 | 80/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -1.1% | -24.1% |
| 2021-12-27 | 80/100 | Consolidation | -5.0% | +5.4% |
| 2023-01-03 | 79/100 | Consolidation | +5.2% | +12.6% |
| 2022-01-11 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -1.0% | +15.3% |
| 2024-09-18 | 78/100 | Consolidation | -11.5% | -34.9% |
| 2022-04-28 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +1.2% | -13.8% |
| 2023-11-01 | 76/100 | Consolidation | +4.1% | +21.3% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLV (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
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
61
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
56
Quality
47
Value
50
Momentum
50
Risk
54
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
75
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING REGN...
Recent media coverage of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals has focused on its stock performance and comparative valuation against peers like Vertex. Analysts debate whether Regeneron remains a strong investment, with some highlighting its potential while others caution against it amid broader biotech sector shifts. The discussion also touches on Regeneron’s drug pipeline and competitive positioning, particularly in contrast to rivals such as AbbVie, though no major breakthroughs or controversies are explicitly mentioned.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. News trend score: 100. Reason: 13 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
19
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
41
Fundamentals
75
Technical
50
Valuation
50
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+29%
Market Narrative
59
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+22
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior suggests **herding** dominates, as REGN’s decline mirrors peer performance (-2.1% vs. -2.7%), indicating passive alignment rather than independent action. Euphoria persists due to strong valuation (+16.3% above 200-day average), despite negative momentum, reflecting a disconnect between technical signals and sentiment. The narrative gap (62 vs. 37) hints at overoptimistic expectations, but no clear bias like overconfidence or anchoring is active. The key question is whether this coordinated movement signals a broader sector rotation or a temporary pause in momentum-driven flows.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:18 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Vertex vs. Regeneron: Which Biotech Giant Is the Better Buy Right Now?"
"Biotech just staged one of its sharpest reversals in years, and whether you caught it or completely missed it, the same uncomfortable question now sits in front of every portfolio: does the trade still have teeth, or did the easy money already leave?"
📈 12D 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
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Peter Lynch — 22/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
The stark divide in verdicts for REGN reflects deep methodological differences in how these investors evaluate stocks. Walter Bagehot’s near-perfect score highlights his focus on liquidity and resilience during crises, suggesting the stock would fare well under stress—something no other framework prioritizes. Meanwhile, patient, long-term thinkers like Morgan Housel and Gerald Loeb see it as a reasonable hold, but their scores trail Bagehot’s, indicating they lack the same conviction in defensive strength. At the other end, Fisher, Lynch, and Graham’s Enterprising Investor model dismiss it outright, prioritizing growth quality, valuation discipline, or statistical cheapness—principles this stock fails to meet. The middle-ground methodologies (Nelson, Smith, Livermore) are lukewarm, reflecting ambiguity in trends or market positioning, while efficient-market adherents and Marks’ cycle analysis see it as unexceptional, reinforcing skepticism about active picking here.
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)
🟢 84
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 74
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 72
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 65
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 60
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)
🟡 59
Mixed — doesn't clearly pass Graham's tests
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 59
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
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
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 45
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)
🟡 43
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 38
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 35
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 32
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 22
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (4 bullish · 6 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.
Gross Margin
—
Operating Margin
24.9%
Net Margin
31.4%
EBITDA Margin
28.7%
ROE
14.4%
ROA
11.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
$43.07
Cash
$3.12B
Total Debt
$1.99B
Current Ratio
4.13
Debt/Equity
0.06
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 18.8.2026 | $0.940 |
| 20.5.2026 | $0.940 |
| 19.5.2026 | $0.940 |
| 20.2.2026 | $0.940 |
| 19.2.2026 | $0.940 |
| 20.11.2025 | $0.880 |
| 19.11.2025 | $0.880 |
| 18.8.2025 | $0.880 |
| 17.8.2025 | $0.880 |
| 20.5.2025 | $0.880 |
| 19.5.2025 | $0.880 |
| 20.2.2025 | $0.880 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$287.82
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$276.24
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 13 positive, 6 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
MarketBeat · 12.9.2026
Yahoo · 12.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Insider Monkey · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 61/100, 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.
REGN currently scores 61/100 (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.
REGN's technical score is 50/100, which currently reads as neutral — 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: Debt/equity: 0.06; Current ratio: 4.13; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: -0.03 (3y annualized return -1.6% / max drawdown 59.8%); MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum.
Yes — REGN 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 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McCourt Marion | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 1,131 | -1,131 | $857.39 |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 400 | -400 | — |
| Guarini Kathryn | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 400 | -400 | $850.00 |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 400 | +400 | $719.37 |
| McCourt Marion | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 1,215 | -1,215 | $850.00 |
| LAROSA JOSEPH J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 12,282 | +12,282 | $381.92 |
| LAROSA JOSEPH J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 19.8.2026 | 9,019 | -9,019 | $830.15 |
| LAROSA JOSEPH J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 19.8.2026 | 12,282 | -12,282 | — |
| Fenimore Christopher R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 18.8.2026 | 6,283 | +6,283 | $381.92 |
| Fenimore Christopher R. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 18.8.2026 | 6,283 | -6,283 | — |
| Fenimore Christopher R. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 18.8.2026 | 4,599 | -4,599 | $813.47 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 800 | -800 | $800.00 |
| Guarini Kathryn | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 400 | -400 | $800.00 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 800 | -800 | — |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 400 | -400 | — |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 400 | +400 | $719.37 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 800 | +800 | $376.69 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 2,503 | +800 | $376.69 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 1,703 | -800 | $800.00 |
| Zoghbi Huda Y | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 0 | -800 | — |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 1,558 | -400 | — |
| Guarini Kathryn | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 10.8.2026 | 1,003 | +400 | $719.37 |
| Guarini Kathryn | Open Market Sale | 10.8.2026 | 603 | -400 | $800.00 |
| RYAN ARTHUR F | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 200 | -200 | $650.15 |
| RYAN ARTHUR F | Open Market Sale | 2.7.2026 | 17,303 | -200 | $650.15 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,552,029 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,385,841 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.8% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.3% 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