Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$72.33
▲ $0.06 (+0.1%)
Market data updated: 09/17 12:33 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/16/2026
News analyzed: 09/17/2026
Market Cap
$11.34B
Day Range
$72.22 - $72.37
52-Week Range
$43.20 - $72.62
Beta
—
Next Earnings
03.11.2026
TECH 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.
+40.1% (1Y)
Strengths: 13/28 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
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: 152.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $26.30 vs. price $72.33 (-63.6%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (62/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 1 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 1
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
60
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
62
Quality
42
Value
33
Momentum
62
Risk
56
Sentiment
98
Fundamental
66
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
SCANNING TECH...
Recent media coverage of Bio-Techne has primarily focused on its **climate and sustainability achievements**, with headlines highlighting the company’s validation by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) for its greenhouse gas reduction targets—aiming for a 70% cut in Scope 1 & 2 emissions by FY2031. Reports also note significant operational emissions reductions in FY2026, including a 49% year-over-year drop in market-based Scope 1 and 2 emissions, alongside supplier engagement efforts. The company’s progress was briefly compared to peers in Q2 earnings analyses, but no substantive operational or financial details beyond sustainability were emphasized.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Bio-Techne. News trend score: 98. Reason: 10 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
39
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
36
Psychology
92
Fundamentals
66
Technical
62
Valuation
33
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
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.
Price (3M)
+32%
Market Narrative
76
Fundamental Reality
36
Narrative Gap
+40
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior reflects rigid price expectations near resistance, consistent with extreme valuation (175% above DCF) and minimal momentum. Overconfidence and confirmation bias further suggest investors are selectively validating narratives while ignoring stagnant price action. The key open question is whether the narrative gap (+41) will persist or if fundamentals will force a reassessment. Herding remains muted, but euphoria persists due to detached valuation metrics. Breakout or breakdown from resistance could disrupt anchoring dominance.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 09:29 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"SBTi validates Bio-Techne’s Scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas reduction targets"
"Market-based Scope 1 and 2 emissions reduced 49% year-over-year"
"Bio-Techne has outperformed the broader market over the past year"
"stocks featured... signal strong business execution, positive market sentiment"
📈 11D 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
Benjamin Graham — 18/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with the most bullish voices—Walter Bagehot and Gerald Loeb—seeing it as a resilient or capital-preserving bet, while the most bearish, like Benjamin Graham and Philip Fisher, dismiss it outright as lacking fundamental or qualitative merit. The contrast between Bagehot’s near-perfect score (100) and Fisher’s low (19) highlights a clash between structural stability (liquidity, credit resilience) and growth/quality thresholds. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch and Morgan Housel’s moderate enthusiasm (72 each) suggests it’s a *potential* long-term compounder, though not a slam dunk—reflecting their focus on undervalued growth or patient holding rather than speculative bets. The middle ground, from Livermore to Malkiel, reveals uncertainty: some see no clear trend (Livermore, Schwager), while others flag valuation risks (Marks, Nelson) or cyclical overreach (Marks’ market-cycle take). The divergence underscores whether the stock’s appeal lies in defensive traits (Bagehot) or speculative upside (Lynch), or if it’s simply too risky or overpriced for most frameworks.
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
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟢 78
Reasonable capital-preservation profile
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 72
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟢 72
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 61
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 60
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 53
No clear edge either way
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)
🟡 46
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 45
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 43
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 41
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 40
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
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
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)
🔴 28
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
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 19
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 18
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 277 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟡 Indicators are mixed — no clear bias (6 bullish · 4 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.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$70.49
Range Bottom
$72.62
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
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
65.8%
Operating Margin
20.7%
Net Margin
15.0%
EBITDA Margin
28.7%
ROE
8.6%
ROA
7.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$1.17
Cash
$264.71M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
4.55
Debt/Equity
—
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 24.8.2026 | $0.080 |
| 18.5.2026 | $0.080 |
| 17.5.2026 | $0.080 |
| 13.2.2026 | $0.080 |
| 12.2.2026 | $0.080 |
| 17.11.2025 | $0.080 |
| 16.11.2025 | $0.080 |
| 18.8.2025 | $0.080 |
| 17.8.2025 | $0.080 |
| 19.5.2025 | $0.080 |
| 18.5.2025 | $0.080 |
| 14.2.2025 | $0.080 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$72.33
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$26.30
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-63.6%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
2.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.3% | $269.20M | $246.98M |
| 2 | 2.3% | $275.47M | $231.86M |
| 3 | 2.4% | $282.05M | $217.79M |
| 4 | 2.4% | $288.94M | $204.69M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $296.16M | $192.48M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$263.22M
Terminal Value
$4.67B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$3.04B
Enterprise Value
$4.13B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$4.13B
*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
$13.43
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$5.28
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 10 positive, 8 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Simply Wall St. · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
ChartMill · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 1.9.2026
PR Newswire · 1.9.2026
Benzinga · 1.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
StockStory · 31.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 26.8.2026
StockStory · 26.8.2026
Yahoo · 24.8.2026
StockStory · 24.8.2026
Yahoo · 21.8.2026
Yahoo · 18.8.2026
Barchart · 18.8.2026
Yahoo · 17.8.2026
StockStory · 17.8.2026
Bio-Techne (TECH) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 60/100, 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.
TECH currently scores 60/100 (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, TECH's estimated fair value is $26.30, which is 63.6% below the current price of $72.33. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TECH's technical score is 62/100, 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: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 152.2%; Net income growth: 147.8%; ATR: 0.4% of price.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $26.30 vs. price $72.33 (-63.6%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Calmar: 0.01 (3y annualized return 0.5% / max drawdown 48.5%).
Yes — TECH 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 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geist William | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 23,985 | +23,985 | — |
| Crouse Steven C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 8,702 | +8,702 | — |
| Crouse Steven C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 14,140 | +14,140 | — |
| Kelderman Kim | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 57,590 | +57,590 | — |
| Kelderman Kim | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 93,582 | +93,582 | — |
| Bohnen Shane | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 11,344 | +11,344 | — |
| Geist William | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 14,762 | +14,762 | — |
| Hippel James | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 36,459 | +36,459 | — |
| Hippel James | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 22,438 | +22,438 | — |
| Bohnen Shane | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 18,432 | +18,432 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Grant/Award from Employer | 17.8.2026 | 1,381 | +1,381 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 311 | -311 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 118 | -118 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 160 | -160 | — |
| Bohnen Shane | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,343 | -1,343 | $72.40 |
| Bohnen Shane | Disposition to the Company | 15.8.2026 | 4,502 | -4,502 | — |
| Crouse Steven C. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 1,868 | -1,868 | — |
| Geist William | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 3,226 | -3,226 | — |
| Bohnen Shane | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 2,332 | -2,332 | — |
| Geist William | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 2,623 | -2,623 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 213 | -213 | $72.40 |
| Crouse Steven C. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,947 | -1,947 | $72.40 |
| Geist William | Disposition to the Company | 15.8.2026 | 8,507 | -8,507 | — |
| Geist William | Disposition to the Company | 15.8.2026 | 22,898 | -22,898 | — |
| Herr Amy E. | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 589 | +589 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
5,889,876 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 9,277,342 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
36.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 36.2% 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