Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$143.45
▼ $3.28 (-2.2%)
Market data updated: 09/20 01:22 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$16.01B
Day Range
$142.45 - $146.89
52-Week Range
$81.22 - $149.52
Beta
—
Next Earnings
26.10.2026
Support
$102.37
Resistance
$149.52
RVTY 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.
+63.5% (1Y)
Strengths: 17/33 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
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Leverage risk
Debt/equity: 0.44
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $40.53 vs. price $143.45 (-71.7%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
73/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
87/100
Analog Quality
+2.5%
Median 40D Outcome
64/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
47%
+2.0% … +7.8%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.1% … +0.4%
🔴 Bearish
40%
-11.1% … -4.3%
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 47% (95% CI 25%–70%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of +0.6%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
13 occurrence(s) · 46% historical success
Echo #2 — Momentum Breakout
1 occurrence(s) · 0% 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 | 20% (7%–45%) | -1.8% | -5.8% … +0.3% | +0.4% |
| 10D | 7% (1%–30%) | -4.7% | -5.7% … -1.2% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.6% | -4.9% … +4.3% | +1.2% |
| 40D | 53% (30%–75%) | +2.5% | -5.8% … +7.3% | +1.7% |
| 60D | 40% (20%–64%) | -2.9% | -12.0% … +6.4% | +1.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-07-30 | 73/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -3.7% | -6.8% |
| 2021-01-07 | 69/100 | Uptrend | -9.7% | -17.2% |
| 2020-07-31 | 65/100 | Uptrend | -1.7% | +4.3% |
| 2021-08-04 | 65/100 | Uptrend | +0.6% | -5.1% |
| 2020-11-06 | 63/100 | Uptrend | +1.8% | +0.8% |
| 2018-08-03 | 63/100 | Uptrend | +7.1% | -2.9% |
| 2020-12-08 | 61/100 | Uptrend | +8.5% | -17.8% |
| 2026-01-15 | 60/100 | Uptrend | -16.7% | -18.9% |
| 2020-10-05 | 59/100 | Uptrend | +2.3% | +8.4% |
| 2020-06-01 | 58/100 | Uptrend | -6.1% | +14.0% |
| 2020-07-17 | 58/100 | Uptrend | +8.5% | +17.8% |
| 2026-05-29 | 57/100 | Uptrend | +6.4% | +19.4% |
| 2021-11-16 | 56/100 | Uptrend | +1.6% | -3.7% |
| 2025-01-30 | 55/100 | Uptrend | -11.6% | -25.1% |
| 2019-02-06 | 55/100 | ✓ Uptrend | -0.4% | +3.2% |
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
62
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
3d ago · $145.94
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 77)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
3d ago · $145.94
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 24 to 61 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 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
34
Quality
47
Value
33
Momentum
86
Risk
54
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
63
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING RVTY...
Recent media coverage of Revvity has centered on its **strong financial performance and market outlook**, including improved growth projections for 2026, robust cash flow, and a rising stock price (up 57.5% year-to-date). Analysts like KeyBanc and Baird have raised price targets ($165 and $144, respectively) while maintaining optimistic ratings, though concerns persist over its **premium valuation** and software-related risks. The company’s position in the **growing multiplex assays market** (projected to reach $12.4B by 2030) is also highlighted, though broader valuation debates remain.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Revvity. News trend score: 100. Reason: 11 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
67
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Investors appear highly excited (67), but evidence of strong fundamental conviction is comparatively weak (37).
Psychology
74
Fundamentals
63
Technical
86
Valuation
33
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.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price (3M)
+43%
Market Narrative
92
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+55
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
RVTY’s dominant herding behavior suggests traders are aligning with peer group movements, particularly after a minor underperformance relative to its sector. The extreme valuation (+214% vs. DCF) and euphoric momentum (RSI 69, +9% ROC) imply overconfidence may be reinforcing herd-like behavior, while anchoring near resistance could limit corrective selling. The wide narrative gap (87 vs. 37) hints at detached optimism, but the key question remains whether momentum can sustain itself or if herding will reverse on peer weakness. The absence of panic or loss aversion signals confidence, not distress.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:18 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"valuation and premium price call for selectivity"
"raises the price target from $125 to $165"
"Revvity’s share price return has been strong, with a 1-year total shareholder return of 44.46%"
"questions remain about growth momentum and rising competitive pressure"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 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
Jesse Livermore — 77/100
🔴 Weakest match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 5/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on his documented principles, the model estimates that Jesse Livermore’s price‑action criteria give RVTY a positive rating (77) because the recent trend matches his requirement for sustained upward momentum. In contrast, Graham‑style value investors assign low scores (27) and note that the stock fails defensive criteria, while the Enterprising Graham variant also finds it insufficiently cheap, highlighting a fundamental‑valuation clash. Mid‑range scores from investors such as Smith, Bagehot, and Schwager reflect mixed views on liquidity, risk, and the lack of a clear edge, suggesting that the stock is reasonable for some but not compelling for strict risk‑control frameworks. Finally, behavioral and speculative perspectives (Mackay, Veblen, Nelson) flag the stock as possibly caught in crowd delusion or late‑cycle overbought dynamics, which together with Housel’s volatility concerns and Marks’ caution, illustrate why many historically‑grounded strategies view RVTY as risky despite the bullish technical signal.
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟢 77
Positive trend — the price action Livermore looked for
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 57
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
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟡 57
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 55
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 54
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)
🔴 33
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
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 27
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 27
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 26
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 25
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 24
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 14
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 14
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
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?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 5
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 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (11 bullish · 1 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.
High 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
54.8%
Operating Margin
12.5%
Net Margin
8.4%
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
3.3%
ROA
2.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$2.07
Cash
$919.86M
Total Debt
$3.22B
Current Ratio
1.68
Debt/Equity
0.44
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 17.7.2026 | $0.070 |
| 16.7.2026 | $0.070 |
| 17.4.2026 | $0.070 |
| 16.4.2026 | $0.070 |
| 16.1.2026 | $0.070 |
| 15.1.2026 | $0.070 |
| 17.10.2025 | $0.070 |
| 16.10.2025 | $0.070 |
| 18.7.2025 | $0.070 |
| 17.7.2025 | $0.070 |
| 17.4.2025 | $0.070 |
| 16.4.2025 | $0.070 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$143.45
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$40.53
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-71.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-3.2%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -3.2% | $493.02M | $452.31M |
| 2 | -1.8% | $484.21M | $407.55M |
| 3 | -0.4% | $482.47M | $372.56M |
| 4 | 1.1% | $487.64M | $345.46M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $499.83M | $324.86M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$509.41M
Terminal Value
$7.88B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$5.12B
Enterprise Value
$7.03B
Net Debt
$2.30B
Equity Value
$4.73B
*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
$64.57
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$43.67
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 11 positive, 7 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
ChartMill · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Benzinga · 15.9.2026
CNBC · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Revvity (RVTY) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 62/100, 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.
RVTY currently scores 62/100 (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.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, RVTY's estimated fair value is $40.53, which is 71.7% below the current price of $143.45. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
RVTY's technical score is 86/100, 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: Debt/equity: 0.44; Current ratio: 1.68; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $40.53 vs. price $143.45 (-71.7%); SMA 50 recently crossed below SMA 200; Operating margin is eroding over time.
Yes — RVTY 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 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MICHAS ALEXIS P | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 6,985 | -285 | — |
| MICHAS ALEXIS P | Gift | 25.8.2026 | 285 | -285 | — |
| Goldberg Joel S | Gift | 14.8.2026 | 27,785 | +27,785 | — |
| Goldberg Joel S | Gift | 14.8.2026 | 27,785 | -27,785 | — |
| Singh Prahlad R. | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 7,636 | +7,636 | — |
| Singh Prahlad R. | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 59,650 | +59,650 | — |
| Singh Prahlad R. | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 59,650 | -59,650 | — |
| Singh Prahlad R. | Gift | 13.8.2026 | 7,636 | -7,636 | — |
| Gonzales Anita | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 85 | -85 | $109.48 |
| Gonzales Anita | Open Market Sale | 20.7.2026 | 7,201 | -85 | $109.48 |
| Gonzales Anita | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.6.2026 | 33 | -33 | $99.66 |
| Vounatsos Michel | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| Chapin Samuel R. | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| Witney Frank | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,265 | +1,265 | — |
| Witz Pascale | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| McMurry-Heath Michelle | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| McMurry-Heath Michelle | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,265 | +1,265 | — |
| Witz Pascale | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,265 | +1,265 | — |
| Vounatsos Michel | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,265 | +1,265 | — |
| MICHAS ALEXIS P | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,217 | +1,217 | — |
| MICHAS ALEXIS P | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,467 | +1,467 | — |
| Barrett Peter | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,265 | +1,265 | — |
| Witney Frank | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| Klobuchar Michael A | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
| Vandebroek Sophie V. | Grant/Award from Employer | 7.5.2026 | 1,015 | +1,015 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
6,305,681 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 7,052,617 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
55.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 45.2% 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