Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$4.33
▲ $0.08 (+1.9%)
Market data updated: 09/30 06:03 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$266.62M
Day Range
$4.25 - $4.50
52-Week Range
$2.20 - $7.95
Beta
—
Next Earnings
16.11.2026
Support
$4.00
Resistance
$5.91
TLSI 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.
-4.8% (1Y)
Strengths: 10/31 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
🟢 Bullish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 53.4%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$13.08 vs. price $4.33 (-402.0%)
Fair Value
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
🌱 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
46
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
54
Quality
63
Value
38
Momentum
13
Risk
46
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
51
Institutional
86
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 TriSalus Life Sciences has centered on its financial performance and strategic updates. The company reported Q2 2026 earnings, missing EPS estimates but exceeding sales targets, while affirming its full-year 2026 revenue guidance of $54–57 million. Key themes included FDA-related progress and expansion of tumor-treatment applications, highlighted at industry conferences like the H.C. Wainwright Global Investment Conference. A new CMS G-code was also noted as a potential growth catalyst.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc.. News trend score: 100. Reason: 15 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
18
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
46
Psychology
56
Fundamentals
51
Technical
13
Valuation
38
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
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.
Price (3M)
-6%
Market Narrative
56
Fundamental Reality
46
Narrative Gap
+10
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
TLSI’s psychology score (33) reflects detached euphoria—likely due to its 18.8% premium over the 200-day average, despite weak momentum (-8.9% ROC). The narrative gap (5 points) suggests traders may overestimate fundamentals relative to technicals. Overconfidence is implied by the price-fundamental divergence, but no dominant bias emerges. The key question: *Is the premium sustainable, or will sentiment (92/100) falter under pressure?*
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:59 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"TriSalus Highlights Tumor-Treatment Expansion, FDA Catalyst at Growth Conference"
"TriSalus Life Sciences to Participate in the H.C. Wainwright & Company 28th Annual Global Investment Conference"
"TriSalus Life Sciences reported quarterly losses of $(0.16) per share which missed the analyst consensus estimate of $(0.15)"
"TriSalus Life Sciences affirms FY2026 sales outlook from $54.000 million-$57.000 million"
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
Jesse Livermore — 9/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between value and quality investors, with Benjamin Graham’s model giving it a near-perfect score as an attractive defensive hold, while Philip Fisher and Samuel Armstrong Nelson also see strong fundamentals—Fisher praising its exceptional quality and Nelson noting a favorable cycle position. However, the more cautious and contrarian voices, like Jesse Livermore and Jack Schwager, reject it outright, with Livermore flagging a negative trend and Schwager dismissing it as lacking a disciplined setup. Meanwhile, behavioral economists like Charles Mackay and Thorstein Veblen warn of crowd-driven excitement and profit translation doubts, while efficient-market theorists and Howard Marks downplay its edge over passive investing or question whether its strengths are already priced in. The contrast highlights how value-driven methodologies celebrate undervaluation and defensive traits, while trend-following and contrarian approaches dismiss it as either overbought or lacking a clear edge.
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 100
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 100
Not enough valuation data for a real Enterprising-Graham read
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 96
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)
🟢 91
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 76
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 75
Exceptional company quality by Fisher's standards
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
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
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 63
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 56
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 56
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)
🟡 54
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 52
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
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 51
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
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 9
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
Based on the last 288 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 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
84.6%
Operating Margin
-59.7%
Net Margin
-86.9%
EBITDA Margin
-58.3%
ROE
115.8%
ROA
-111.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$1.84
Cash
$20.44M
Total Debt
$33.05M
Current Ratio
2.80
Debt/Equity
-0.98
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$4.33
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$13.08
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-402.0%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
25.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25.0% | $-23.66M | $-21.71M |
| 2 | 19.4% | $-28.25M | $-23.78M |
| 3 | 13.8% | $-32.13M | $-24.81M |
| 4 | 8.1% | $-34.74M | $-24.61M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-35.61M | $-23.14M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-18.93M
Terminal Value
$-561.55M
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-364.97M
Enterprise Value
$-483.02M
Net Debt
$12.61M
Equity Value
$-495.62M
*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
-$0.89
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$0.89
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 15 positive, 4 neutral, 1 negative out of the last 20 articles.
ChartMill · 24.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Yahoo · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
Benzinga · 23.9.2026
ChartMill · 22.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Benzinga · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 31.8.2026
Business Wire · 31.8.2026
MarketBeat · 18.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
GuruFocus.com · 7.8.2026
SeekingAlpha · 6.8.2026
TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc. (TLSI) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 46/100, 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.
TLSI currently scores 46/100 (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, TLSI's estimated fair value is -$13.08, which is 402.0% below the current price of $4.33. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TLSI's technical score is 13/100, 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: Revenue growth (last year): 53.4%; Free cash flow growth: 54.0%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$13.08 vs. price $4.33 (-402.0%); Operating margin: -59.7% (negative); Net margin: -86.9% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TLSI.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 12 purchases and 2 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patience David | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 14,650 | -14,650 | $4.46 |
| Patience David | Tax Withholding in Shares | 1.7.2026 | 261,107 | -14,650 | $4.46 |
| Marshak Richard | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 561 | +561 | $3.87 |
| Szela Mary T | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 3,990 | +3,990 | $3.87 |
| Szela Mary T | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 1,077,683 | +3,990 | $3.87 |
| Marshak Richard | Grant/Award from Employer | 30.6.2026 | 128,319 | +561 | $3.87 |
| Marshall Richard Henry | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.6.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | — |
| Marshall Richard Henry | Grant/Award from Employer | 29.6.2026 | 120,000 | +120,000 | — |
| Patience David | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 7,100 | +7,100 | $2.43 |
| Wahlstrom Mats | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 60,000 | +60,000 | $2.53 |
| Stansky Michael P | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 200,000 | +200,000 | $2.50 |
| Marshak Richard | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 543 | -543 | $2.67 |
| Stansky Michael P | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 410,000 | +410,000 | $2.50 |
| Szela Mary T | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 39,682 | +39,682 | $2.59 |
| Gordon Gary B. | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 10,000 | +10,000 | $2.46 |
| Szela Mary T | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,065,215 | +39,682 | $2.59 |
| Stansky Michael P | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 1,240,722 | +410,000 | $2.50 |
| Stansky Michael P | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 399,698 | +200,000 | $2.50 |
| Wahlstrom Mats | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 147,555 | +60,000 | $2.53 |
| Gordon Gary B. | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 72,510 | +10,000 | $2.46 |
| Patience David | Open Market Purchase | 15.5.2026 | 275,757 | +7,100 | $2.43 |
| Marshak Richard | Open Market Sale | 15.5.2026 | 125,101 | -543 | $2.67 |
| MATLIN DAVID J | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 28,201 | +28,201 | — |
| Valle William | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 56,403 | +56,403 | — |
| Gordon Gary B. | Grant/Award from Employer | 14.5.2026 | 56,403 | +56,403 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
3,345,269 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 3,692,615 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
59.9% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 68.6% 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