Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$7.92
▲ $0.15 (+1.9%)
Market data updated: 09/30 03:57 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/30/2026
News analyzed: 09/30/2026
Market Cap
$717.26M
Day Range
$7.56 - $8.12
52-Week Range
$3.43 - $10.82
Beta
—
Next Earnings
02.11.2026
Support
$5.54
Resistance
$8.65
VSTM 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.
-8.3% (1Y)
Strengths: 11/26 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
🟡 Mixed
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): 209.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -550.3% (negative)
Fundamental
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
53
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
4d ago · $7.84
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 19 to -6 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
57
Quality
42
Value
50
Momentum
74
Risk
40
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
25
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 Verastem, Inc. has centered on its financial outlook and pipeline progress, particularly around its KRAS G12D inhibitor (VS-7375) and rare-disease drug AVMAPKI (FAK inhibitor). Analysts have adjusted price targets downward—from $14 to $12 or $13—while maintaining positive ratings, reflecting cautious optimism. The company’s Q2 2026 earnings call highlighted revenue trends and upcoming catalysts, including potential sales momentum for its rare-disease drug, which may fund further development of its KRAS-focused pipeline. Investor conferences and analyst commentary dominate recent discussions.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Verastem, Inc.. News trend score: 68. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
33
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
54
Psychology
48
Fundamentals
25
Technical
74
Valuation
50
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
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.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
+93%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
54
Narrative Gap
+7
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
VSTM’s psychology is dominated by anchoring (98), where traders appear fixated on a near-term resistance level (0.1% away), despite euphoric momentum (68) and detached valuation (overconfidence 30). The narrative-reality gap (19) hints at overoptimism, but the lack of panic (5) or herd behavior (0) suggests discipline remains. The key question: will traders break resistance, or will anchoring hold as momentum stalls? The extreme overvaluation (55.1% above 200-day average) may eventually test this equilibrium.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 11:36 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Mizuho lowers price target on Verastem to $13 from $14"
"Verastem Q2 Earnings Call Transcript and Highlights"
"AVMAPKI FAKZYNJA sales momentum funds KRAS G12D pipeline"
"Verastem reports Q2 loss, beats revenue estimates"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 5D 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 — 73/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock splits methodologies into two starkly opposing camps: the bullish traders and the deeply cautious or bearish observers. Jesse Livermore and Walter Bagehot both see strong potential—Livermore detects a favorable price trend, while Bagehot’s liquidity-focused approach suggests resilience in a downturn. However, Peter Lynch and Jack Schwager are lukewarm, with Lynch noting that the stock’s price already discounts much of its growth, while Schwager finds no decisive edge. On the other end, the majority of value-driven and defensive investors—from Benjamin Graham to Philip Fisher—reject the stock outright, either for lacking statistical cheapness, quality, or defensive traits. Meanwhile, cyclical and behavioral analysts like Howard Marks, Charles Mackay, and Samuel Armstrong Nelson flag it as overvalued, speculative, or prone to crowd-driven volatility, with Morgan Housel warning of the kind of instability that could deter patient investors. The contrast highlights a stock that appeals to momentum-driven traders but raises red flags for those prioritizing fundamentals, risk management, or long-term stability.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 73
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟡 62
Mixed — growth exists but the price already reflects much of it
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 54
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 50
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
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 49
Some signs of crowd excitement building
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)
🟡 47
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)
🟡 46
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)
🟡 46
Mid-cycle — no strong signal either way
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 45
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
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
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
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
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 37
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
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
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?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 289 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 2 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
-550.3%
Net Margin
-677.6%
EBITDA Margin
-550.3%
ROE
-366.2%
ROA
-85.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$3.02
Cash
$204.99M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.09
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$0.83
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.59
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 7 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 28.9.2026
Yahoo · 24.9.2026
Yahoo · 22.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Zacks · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Business Wire · 8.9.2026
Benzinga · 8.9.2026
Business Wire · 2.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 31.8.2026
Simply Wall St. · 25.8.2026
Motley Fool · 13.8.2026
MT Newswires · 11.8.2026
Benzinga · 11.8.2026
MarketBeat · 7.8.2026
Benzinga · 7.8.2026
Verastem, Inc. (VSTM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 53/100, 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.
VSTM currently scores 53/100 (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.
VSTM's technical score is 74/100, 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): 209.1%; Current ratio: 3.09; Price is above the 50-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -550.3% (negative); Net margin: -677.6% (negative); Operating margin is eroding over time.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for VSTM.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 9 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calkins Daniel | Open Market Sale | 21.9.2026 | 118,014 | -55 | $7.70 |
| Paterson Dan | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 1,302 | -1,302 | $5.81 |
| Paterson Dan | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 589,940 | -1,302 | $5.81 |
| Paterson Dan | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 20,871 | -20,871 | $4.18 |
| Calkins Daniel | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 4,032 | -4,032 | $4.18 |
| Calkins Daniel | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 57 | -57 | $4.13 |
| Calkins Daniel | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 117,295 | -4,032 | $4.18 |
| Calkins Daniel | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 117,238 | -57 | $4.13 |
| Paterson Dan | Open Market Sale | 22.6.2026 | 591,242 | -20,871 | $4.18 |
| Stuglik Brian M | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| ROBERTSON MICHELLE | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| JOHNSON JOHN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| BAILEY MICHAEL P | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 108,000 | +108,000 | — |
| Bunn Paul A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| Rowinsky Eric K | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| Kapur Anil | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| Tollefson Karin Anna | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 36,000 | +36,000 | — |
| Rowinsky Eric K | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 52,666 | +36,000 | — |
| JOHNSON JOHN | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 52,666 | +36,000 | — |
| Bunn Paul A. | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 44,333 | +36,000 | — |
| Kapur Anil | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 52,666 | +36,000 | — |
| ROBERTSON MICHELLE | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 52,666 | +36,000 | — |
| Stuglik Brian M | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 137,147 | +36,000 | — |
| Tollefson Karin Anna | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 52,666 | +36,000 | — |
| BAILEY MICHAEL P | Grant/Award from Employer | 21.5.2026 | 108,000 | +108,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
18,028,616 shares short as of 2026-09-15 · vs. 18,298,315 on 2026-08-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
52.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.8% 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