Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$6.38
▲ $0.11 (+1.8%)
Market data updated: 09/30 06:43 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$248.22M
Day Range
$6.13 - $6.39
52-Week Range
$5.55 - $16.45
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$5.72
Resistance
$7.97
TRDA 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.
+9.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 4/27 factors positiveRisk: High
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
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Liquidity risk
Current ratio: 12.53
Risk
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$41.37 vs. price $6.38 (-749.0%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 3 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 3
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
32
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
26
Quality
42
Value
43
Momentum
22
Risk
40
Sentiment
44
Fundamental
30
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 Entrada Therapeutics has centered on its financial performance and clinical trial updates. The company reported a Q2 2026 loss but surpassed revenue estimates, with earnings per share slightly better than expected. Key milestones include upcoming data releases from its ELEVATE-44-201 and ELEVATE-45-201 trials, as well as Vertex’s anticipated Phase 1/2 results for VX-670 in DM1 patients. Additionally, there was a notable insider share sale, reflecting internal market activity.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Entrada Therapeutics, Inc.. News trend score: 44. Reason: 4 of the last 14 articles are negative, versus 3 positive.
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)
19
Psychology
50
Fundamentals
30
Technical
22
Valuation
43
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
Price (3M)
-17%
Market Narrative
31
Fundamental Reality
19
Narrative Gap
+12
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
TRDA’s psychology profile is defined by confirmation bias, where investors selectively highlight a narrative gap (+11) despite deteriorating fundamentals (revenue down -0.9%, margins shrinking -6.4pp). The lack of dominant panic or FOMO (scores 21 and 4, respectively) suggests a cautious, selective approach rather than herd-driven behavior. The stock’s underperformance relative to peers (-0.6% vs -1.9%) hints at passive alignment rather than aggressive herding. The key open question is whether the narrative gap will persist despite worsening operational metrics, or if investors will reassess fundamentals.
Updated: 09/05/2026, 05:51 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"reported quarterly losses of $(1.01) per share which beat the analyst consensus estimate of $(1.09) by 7.34%"
"Company to report ELEVATE-44-201 data from Cohort 1 open-label period by year-end 2026"
"Independent Safety Data Monitoring Committee Recommends Initiation of Cohort 2 at the increased dose of 10 mg/kg"
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
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between value-oriented and cyclical investors, with defensive and enterprising Graham methodologies nearly unanimously endorsing it—Graham’s Defensive Investor sees it as ‘attractive,’ while his Enterprising Investor calls it a ‘deep statistical discount.’ Similarly, Bagehot and Mackay’s high scores suggest strong liquidity and no crowd-driven mania, reinforcing a cautious but optimistic view. However, cyclical analysts like Marks, Nelson, and Schwager show more nuance: Marks and Nelson see it as mid-cycle, while Schwager’s neutral stance hints at uncertainty. On the other end, growth-focused investors like Fisher, Lynch, and Housel reject it outright, with Housel’s zero score flagging volatility as a behavioral red flag, while Fisher and Lynch dismiss it for lacking the quality or P/E discipline they demand. The contrast between value-driven enthusiasm and growth skepticism highlights whether the stock’s appeal lies in its undervalued fundamentals or its cyclical positioning—or if it’s simply too volatile for patient, long-term holders.
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: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 100
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
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
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 92
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 87
Deep statistical discount — a real Enterprising Investor candidate
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 77
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 72
Risk appears reasonably priced — no obvious cycle-timing red flag
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 51
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)
🟡 39
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 23
Weak case — Malkiel/Bogle would say a low-cost index is the simpler bet
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
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)
🔴 12
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
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 10
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
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 8
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)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
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
Based on the last 290 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 8 bearish · 2 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
-621.1%
Net Margin
-565.5%
EBITDA Margin
-621.1%
ROE
-47.0%
ROA
-38.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.47
Cash
$90.39M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
12.53
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$6.38
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$41.37
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-749.0%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-123.08M | $-112.91M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-119.23M | $-100.35M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-117.74M | $-90.92M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-118.47M | $-83.93M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-121.44M | $-78.93M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-129.55M
Terminal Value
$-1.91B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-1.24B
Enterprise Value
$-1.71B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-1.71B
*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
$7.40
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$7.40
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 3 positive, 7 neutral, 4 negative out of the last 14 articles.
Benzinga · 24.9.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.9.2026
Zacks · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
GlobeNewswire · 5.8.2026
Yahoo · 5.8.2026
Benzinga · 5.8.2026
MT Newswires · 3.8.2026
Zacks · 3.8.2026
Yahoo · 3.8.2026
Zacks · 30.7.2026
Yahoo · 30.7.2026
GlobeNewswire · 2.6.2026
GlobeNewswire · 1.6.2026
Entrada Therapeutics, Inc. (TRDA) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 32/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
TRDA currently scores 32/100 (Weak) 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, TRDA's estimated fair value is -$41.37, which is 749.0% below the current price of $6.38. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
TRDA's technical score is 22/100, 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: Current ratio: 12.53; NAV per share: $7.40; Current ratio: 12.53.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$41.37 vs. price $6.38 (-749.0%); Operating margin: -621.1% (negative); Net margin: -565.5% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for TRDA.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 17 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 3,885,115 | -28,837 | $7.13 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 9.9.2026 | 3,885,115 | -28,837 | $7.13 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 3,913,952 | -192,500 | $7.41 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 8.9.2026 | 3,913,952 | -192,500 | $7.41 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 4,106,452 | -38,500 | $7.11 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 4.9.2026 | 4,106,452 | -38,500 | $7.11 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 4,144,952 | -32,263 | $7.17 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 4,144,952 | -32,263 | $7.17 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 32,263 | -32,263 | $7.17 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 3.9.2026 | 32,263 | -32,263 | $7.17 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 4,177,215 | -25,131 | $7.19 |
| Doshi Dipal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 517,290 | -8,724 | $7.14 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 4,177,215 | -25,131 | $7.19 |
| Dowden Nathan J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 196,060 | -2,528 | $7.14 |
| WENTWORTH KORY JAMES | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 117,277 | -1,733 | $7.14 |
| Sethuraman Natarajan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 214,238 | -2,079 | $7.14 |
| Sethuraman Natarajan | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 2,079 | -2,079 | $7.14 |
| Dowden Nathan J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 2,528 | -2,528 | $7.14 |
| Doshi Dipal | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 8,724 | -8,724 | $7.14 |
| WENTWORTH KORY JAMES | Tax Withholding in Shares | 2.9.2026 | 1,733 | -1,733 | $7.14 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 25,131 | -25,131 | $7.19 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 2.9.2026 | 25,131 | -25,131 | $7.19 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 4,202,346 | -29,088 | $7.06 |
| MPM BIOVENTURES 2018, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 4,202,346 | -29,088 | $7.06 |
| MPM BioVentures 2014, L.P. | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 29,088 | -29,088 | $7.06 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
2,744,145 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 2,345,803 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
47.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 52.3% 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