Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$46.64
▲ $0.79 (+1.7%)
Market data updated: 09/20 07:48 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$871.23M
Day Range
$45.24 - $46.96
52-Week Range
$24.95 - $52.24
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$35.01
Resistance
$49.90
RIGL 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.
+32.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 22/29 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
🟢 Bullish
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 64.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
MACD
MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum
Technical
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
as of 09/10/202671
This Week
74
7D Ago
↓ -3
Weakening
Technical
68
7D Ago: 81
↓ -13
Fundamental
83
7D Ago: 83
→ 0
Growth
74
7D Ago: 74
→ 0
Valuation
55
7D Ago: 55
→ 0
News
86
7D Ago: 80
↑ +6
Quality
63
7D Ago: 63
→ 0
Risk
62
7D Ago: 62
→ 0
Biggest Improvements
Biggest Declines
📊 Score History
71
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
16d ago · $48.50
Evidence: המניה במגמת עלייה ברורה ללא טווח מסחר מוגדר בטווח הזמן שנבדק.
What happened after
16d ago · $48.50
Evidence: 10 bullish / 2 bearish technical signals agreeing
What happened after
18d ago · $47.50
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 56)
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
⚖️ Base Case
71 / 100
🐻 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 29, 2026
Then
73
$46.48
Now
71
$46.64
What happened since
Signals detected by this date
No signals detected by this date
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
74
Quality
63
Value
55
Momentum
68
Risk
62
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
83
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 Rigel Pharmaceuticals has focused on its financial and strategic updates, particularly around its commercial-stage drugs and investor sentiment. Analysts like HC Wainwright and Piper Sandler have raised price targets ($85 and $49, respectively) and highlighted growth potential from its Veppanu (U.S. launch) and Rezlidhia (Kissei partnership), while the company’s CFO, Dean Schorno, is set to participate in upcoming investor conferences. The stock’s valuation has been revised upward, reflecting optimism about these key products.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 8 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
36
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
44
Psychology
41
Fundamentals
83
Technical
68
Valuation
55
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 stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+42%
Market Narrative
56
Fundamental Reality
44
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
RIGL’s psychology is dominated by **euphoria**, fueled by outsized momentum (+3.6% ROC) and a 40.5% premium over its 200-day average—hallmarks of speculative enthusiasm. The **anchoring effect** (2.5% from resistance) suggests traders may hold or buy near key levels, while **FOMO** (RSI at 69, positive sentiment) keeps liquidity moderate. The **narrative-reality gap** (16-point divergence) hints at rising disconnect between optimism and fundamentals, particularly since price growth (+3.6%) lags EPS growth (+18.7%). The key question: *Will traders extend positions despite widening valuation vs. earnings, or will resistance test the euphoria’s durability?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 07:20 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Piper Sandler raises price target from $40 to $49 (article 5). HC Wainwright raises price target from $57 to $85 (article 8)."
"Veppanu now available in US, Puerto Rico (article 11). Veppanu launch adds growth hope (article 6 & 7)."
"Dean Schorno to participate in upcoming investor conferences (article 2 & 3)."
📈 15D 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
Peter Lynch — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Howard Marks (Market Cycle) — 39/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Peter Lynch’s growth‑focused criteria the model estimates a strong upside (score 96) and Philip Fisher likewise rates the company highly (score 93) for its exceptional quality, leading both to very bullish views. In contrast, more value‑oriented or cycle‑sensitive frameworks such as Graham’s enterprising screen (score 62) and Jack Schwager’s disciplined trading rules (score 37) see limited margin of safety or no clear setup, resulting in modest or negative assessments. Mid‑range scores from Walter Bagehot (liquidity strength 89), Graham’s defensive approach (score 83) and Samuel Armstrong Nelson (cycle position 81) reflect solid fundamentals but less enthusiasm than pure growth fans. Meanwhile, market‑efficiency and crowd‑sentiment lenses (Efficient‑Market 58, Charles Mackay 51) flag only a modest edge over the broader market. Overall, the divergence stems from each methodology’s weighting of growth, quality, safety and cyclical context, producing a spectrum of confidence levels for RIGL.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 96
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 93
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 89
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 82
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 73
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 71
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 65
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 62
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 56
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
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟡 54
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 50
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 46
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 44
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
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)
🟡 39
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 280 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 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.
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
93.3%
Operating Margin
42.6%
Net Margin
124.7%
EBITDA Margin
43.5%
ROE
93.8%
ROA
71.5%
ROIC
—
EPS
$20.40
Cash
$40.58M
Total Debt
$52.50M
Current Ratio
2.42
Debt/Equity
0.13
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$20.78
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$19.47
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
PR Newswire · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 4.9.2026
Yahoo · 2.9.2026
PR Newswire · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.8.2026
Benzinga · 17.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 16.8.2026
Yahoo · 16.8.2026
Benzinga · 14.8.2026
BioPharma Dive · 14.8.2026
Yahoo · 14.8.2026
MT Newswires · 13.8.2026
PR Newswire · 13.8.2026
Yahoo · 13.8.2026
Benzinga · 13.8.2026
Motley Fool · 12.8.2026
Yahoo · 12.8.2026
Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RIGL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 71/100, rated "Strong". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
RIGL currently scores 71/100 (Strong) 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.
RIGL's technical score is 68/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 64.1%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 1867.7%; Net income growth: 1999.1%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: MACD histogram is negative — falling momentum; Price is below the SAR point — downtrend; ROC 12 days: -1.8%.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for RIGL.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 1,286 | -1,286 | — |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 2,000 | -2,000 | — |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 694 | -694 | — |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 1,286 | +1,286 | $24.20 |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 620 | +620 | $18.70 |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 694 | +694 | $12.70 |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 2,000 | +2,000 | $24.20 |
| Schorno Dean L | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 2.9.2026 | 620 | -620 | — |
| RODRIGUEZ RAUL R | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 2,424 | -2,424 | $47.50 |
| Schorno Dean L | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 928 | -928 | $47.50 |
| Furey Raymond J. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 877 | -877 | $47.50 |
| Santos David A | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.9.2026 | 874 | -874 | $47.50 |
| HANNAH ALISON L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 24,400 | +24,400 | — |
| HANNAH ALISON L. | Grant/Award from Employer | 8.7.2026 | 35,025 | +24,400 | — |
| Ali-Jackson Kamil | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 2,500 | -2,500 | $35.00 |
| Ali-Jackson Kamil | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 10,125 | -2,500 | $35.00 |
| Furey Raymond J. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| Schorno Dean L | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| Santos David A | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| Rojkjaer Lisa | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 9,375 | +9,375 | — |
| Rojkjaer Lisa | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| RODRIGUEZ RAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 31,700 | +31,700 | — |
| Schorno Dean L | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| Santos David A | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 7,394 | +7,394 | — |
| RODRIGUEZ RAUL R | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.6.2026 | 31,700 | +31,700 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,182,110 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 3,092,899 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
79.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 65.4% 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