NVS — Novartis AG

Report date: 2026-05-26  |  Sector: Healthcare  |  Last price: $152.01  |  Horizon: 30d  |  Generated: 2026-05-26T07:23:36.549429Z

Forecast summary

Ensemble point +2.51%
80% CI [-3.47%, +8.86%]
95% CI [-6.40%, +12.35%]
Method dispersion 0.0251
Beats RW baseline YES
MC drift (annual) 42.23%
MC sigma (annual) 22.69%
MC paths 1000
Bull target (90th pct) +15.65% -> $175.80
Base target (50th) +4.88% -> $159.44
Bear target (10th pct) -5.19% -> $144.13
Macro regime risk_on_growth
10y yield 4.56%
3m yield 3.59%
Yield-curve slope +0.97%
VIX level 16.59
VIX z-score (252d) -0.48
Sector ETF XLV
Sector relative (90d) +11.83%

Forecast plot (interactive)

Realised volatility

Yang-Zhang annualized (60d) 22.69%
Close-to-close annualized (60d) 20.88%

Per-method comparison

MethodWeightPoint80% lo80% hi95% lo95% hi
linear 25.0% +5.16% +1.47% +8.82% -0.10% +10.82%
monte_carlo 25.0% +4.88% -5.19% +15.65% -10.30% +21.43%
ar1 25.0% +0.00% -1.62% +1.65% -2.46% +2.53%
random_walk 25.0% +0.00% -8.54% +9.33% -12.76% +14.62%

Factor contributions (interactive waterfall)

Factor contribution table

FactorLoadingTicker valueContribution
value_score +0.0495 +0.0148 +0.0007
quality_score +0.0192 +1.9929 +0.0384
momentum_score +0.0286 +0.9744 +0.0279
lowvol_score +0.0173 +0.4559 +0.0079
revisions_score +0.0236 -0.9650 -0.0228
news_activity_score +0.0402 +0.0000 +0.0000
(intercept) - - -0.0005

Factor decay over horizon

Factor IC over time

Per-factor IC backtest summary

FactorMean ICICIR% positiveCumulative attributionn periods
value_score +0.2563 +2.690 100.0% +0.5383 252
quality_score +0.1105 +1.096 86.5% +0.2401 252
momentum_score +0.1428 +1.354 92.5% +0.2460 252
lowvol_score +0.0878 +0.887 82.1% +0.1870 252
revisions_score +0.1375 +1.319 88.9% +0.2738 252
news_activity_score +0.3540 +3.832 100.0% +1.0893 252

Snapshot — fundamentals + technical

Market cap $290.05B
P/E (trailing) 21.8
P/B 6.3
Forward P/E 15.3
PEG 4.10
Dividend yield 312.00%
Beta 0.49
52w high / low $170.46 / $111.06
Distance from 52w high -10.82%
Cross-sectional rank 15 / 92 above median
Panel source (trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), universe_size=92, lookback_days=252)
RSI(14) 58.0
SMA50 / SMA200 $149.70 / $136.97
ATR(14) $2.44
Avg volume (20d) 1.35M
Profit margin 23.92%
ROE 34.93%
Revenue growth (YoY) -0.70%
Earnings growth (YoY) -9.30%
Debt/Equity 120.7
Current ratio 0.85
Short ratio 2.91

Forecast accuracy — walk-forward backtest (60d lookback)

Horizonn predictionsDirectional accuracyMAE (return)RMSE80% CI hit ratePearson(pred, real)
1d 691 52.1% 0.94% 1.26% 81.9% -0.047
30d 662 48.8% 7.25% 8.73% 61.8% -0.224
60d 632 54.1% 12.17% 15.16% 56.8% -0.362

Volume momentum (Granville / CGW / Quong-Soudack)

Composite z +0.258
Active signals 7 of 7
MFI(14) 70.98
CMF(20) -0.1178
OBV z (252d) +0.629
VPT z (252d) +1.126
VW-momentum z +0.144
Volume z (60d) -0.345
Relative volume (vs 20d ADV) 1.04x
CMF z (252d) -0.905

Sector rotation & AI-spillover (v6)

Sector ETF XLV
Rel-return 5d / 20d / 60d -0.63% / +0.51% / -1.02%
Sector mom-z 1m / 3m / 6m -0.27 / -1.19 / -0.82
Rotation phase cyclical
AI-factor beta (60d) -0.290
AI spillover score -0.0267
Risk-off corr regime (60d) 0.33 (>0.6 = risk-off; <0.35 = stock-picking)
Sector breadth (% > SMA50) -
Sector dispersion 20d -

Peer comparison (sector-relative valuation & momentum)

Peer signal
CHEAP LEADER
score +0.56 (9 peers)
P/E percentile
11% (11% cheaper than this)
20d momentum percentile
67% (67% lag this)
Market-cap percentile
56%
Peer set (mcap band 0.2x-5x, same sector)
AZN MRK UNH ABBV AMGN GILD TMO ISRG ABT
9 peers in Healthcare (mcap band 0.2x-5x); signal=cheap_leader; score=+0.56
Decision input: cheap_leader → nudge bias one bucket toward LONG; expensive_laggard → nudge toward SHORT; cheap_laggard = value-trap (neutralize); expensive_leader = crowding risk (neutralize). Folded into Claude critique and one-line PM summary.

Multi-timeframe technical analysis (1wk / 1d / 1h)

Per-timeframe verdict (TradingView-style aggregate of 17 indicators: RSI, MACD, BBands, ADX, Stoch, %R, OBV, MFI, CMF, ATR, SMA50/200, EMA9/21, Donchian, price-vs-SMA200). Counts = how many indicators fired BUY / SELL / NEUTRAL; net strength is the weight-sum delta. Crosses (golden/death, MACD signal cross, Donchian breakout) and the SMA200 trend filter carry 1.5x weight.
1wk verdict
NEUTRAL
3 buy / 2 sell / 12 neutral · net +3.0
1d verdict
SELL
3 buy / 7 sell / 7 neutral · net -9.5
1h verdict
NEUTRAL
2 buy / 5 sell / 10 neutral · net -5.5

1wk NEUTRAL 3/2/12

RSI(14) 56.8
MACD hist -1.6574
Bollinger %b 0.50
ADX(14) 23.9
ATR % 4.22%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 46.7 / +0.074
Donchian pos / break 0.47
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars521

1d SELL 3/7/7

RSI(14) 57.7
MACD hist +0.8087
Bollinger %b 0.92
ADX(14) 12.3
ATR % 1.61%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 71.0 / -0.118
Donchian pos / break 0.95
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars1253

1h NEUTRAL 2/5/10

RSI(14) 58.9
MACD hist -0.0350
Bollinger %b 0.65 SQUEEZE
ADX(14) 21.3
ATR % 0.45%
MFI(14) / CMF(20) 51.4 / -0.175
Donchian pos / break 0.82
vs SMA200 ABOVE
n_bars1728

Cross-timeframe confluence

Confluence LONG (0-1) 0.20
Confluence SHORT (0-1) 0.00
Patterns are intentionally selective (Elder triple-screen, daily/hourly divergence, BB-squeeze+breakout, SMA-alignment, MACD/OBV). Most tickers fire 0-2 patterns on any given day. Below: each pattern with its current state (✓ firing / ✗ not firing).
Long patterns
elder_triple
daily_oversold_hourly_bull
bb_squeeze_break_up
sma_align_long
macd_cross_obv
Short patterns
elder_triple
daily_overbought_hourly_div
bb_squeeze_break_dn
sma_align_short
macd_cross_obv

Intraday nowcast — 1h-bar short-horizon (v6)

Next 24h nowcast
+0.13%
over next 24h on 1h bars
80% band
[-3.00%, +3.36%]
n_bars = 1728 · sigma_1h = 0.0051
Direction vs 30d ensemble
AGREES
1h direction: LONG · 30d direction: LONG
Source: intraday_forecaster_v10_trained_lgbm.
(trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), mean_directional_accuracy=0.523, n_features=17) Decision input only -- the 30d ensemble + factor regression remain the primary call. Conflicts surfaced into the Claude critique as horizon_conflict flag when |1h move| > 1%.

Meta-label gate — AFML Ch.3 secondary classifier (v6)

Verdict
meta-label: NEUTRAL
p_take = 0.57 · threshold 0.60
Bias adjustment
meta-label NEUTRAL (p_take=0.57 between 0.40 and 0.60) -- no adjustment.
Method: secondary LightGBM trained on (features + primary direction) -> P(primary is right). Source: meta_labeler_v10_trained_lgbm.
(trained model: 2026-05-26 (0d old), roc_auc=0.641, accuracy=0.608, n_train_rows=8,284) When ABSTAIN with p_take < 1-threshold AND bias non-neutral, the bias is demoted one bucket and a meta_abstain flag is added to the critique. See AFML Ch.3.6 (Lopez de Prado 2018).

Implied vol vs realized vol — options-trade gate (v8 W2)

Regime
NEUTRAL
no decisive vol mispricing — delta-1 setup over options
IV / RV ratio
1.31
z-score: n/a (insufficient history)
30d IV vs 30d RV
IV 26.3% (Polygon)
RV 20.0% (yang-zhang)
Provenance: source polygon_options:contracts_call; expiry 2026-06-18 (23d) · strike $150.00 · 1 strike(s) used.
Caveat: 15-min delayed end-of-day quotes; free-tier Polygon (no Greeks, no real-time). Regime is qualitative input only — NOT a numeric factor on the regression.

FMP fundamentals & analyst consensus (v7)

Quality / leverage

ROE 34.9%
ROIC -
FCF yield -
Debt / EBITDA -
Current ratio 0.85

Margins / valuation

Gross margin 75.6%
Operating margin 30.5%
Net margin 23.9%
P/E (TTM) 21.8
EV / EBITDA 14.4

Analyst consensus

Target mean -
Target high / low - / -
Upside vs last close -
Revisions score +0.000

Trade-bias signal — foundation for trade-guidance layer

Bias strong_buy
Composite z-score +1.701
Conviction 0.5203611230340276
Recommended playbook A_strong
Suggested position size 0% (no Kelly)
no Kelly: not a conformal singleton (proxy off); singleton-proxy: news_activity_z=+0.00 (nonzero=False), wf30d_dir_acc=0.4879154078549849 (>0.55=False)
Strategies on bias side
ATM long-call (40-60 DTE, delta 0.40-0.55)
Diagonal call spread (long 90-DTE + short 30-DTE OTM)
Covered-call overlay on existing long stock
Why this bias
composite_z = +1.30 | bias = buy | conviction = 0.52 | macro_regime = risk_on_growth | ensemble = +2.51% | peer_nudge buy->strong_buy (cheap_leader)

Sensitivity (OFAT tornado ±1 sd) and stress scenarios

FactorLoading wiTicker z-value+1 sd impact-1 sd impact
value_score +0.0495 +0.015 +0.0495 -0.0495
news_activity_score +0.0402 +0.000 +0.0402 -0.0402
momentum_score +0.0286 +0.974 +0.0286 -0.0286
revisions_score +0.0236 -0.965 +0.0236 -0.0236
quality_score +0.0192 +1.993 +0.0192 -0.0192
lowvol_score +0.0173 +0.456 +0.0173 -0.0173

Stress scenarios (forecast shift from base point)

ScenarioDescriptionStressed pointDelta vs base
rates_+100bps Yield curve +100bps (lowvol -1sd, value -0.5sd) +0.95% -4.20%
recession_risk_off Recession (momentum -1.5sd, lowvol +1sd, news -1sd) -1.43% -6.58%
quality_flight Quality flight (quality +1sd, revisions +1sd, momentum -0.5sd) +8.01% +2.86%

Multi-source live sentiment (free real-time)

Composite z-score -1.000
Active signals 2 of 3
Sources stocktwits, iv_skew
StockTwits bull 14
StockTwits bear 0
StockTwits net +1.00
Message volume 30
ApeWisdom mentions 0
24h change +0
Reddit rank -
25-delta IV skew +0.3750
IV-skew read bearish

Analyst critique

Agreement with model agree_with_caveats
Confidence 0.55
PM one-liner NVS Healthcare: quant +2.51%/30d, disp +0.0251, beats RW, macro neutral, 0 catalyst(s).
Sensitivity concern If value_score (the highest-loading factor) is mis-measured by +/-1 stdev, the bias likely flips.

What the model may have missed

Critique flags

Factor contribution methodology — where the numbers come from

Point return formula (linear factor model): r_hat = alpha + sum_i (w_i × f_i) where w_i is the cross-sectional loading for factor i (estimated from the cross-section of US large-cap names) and f_i is the z-scored factor value for this ticker (Grinold-Kahn winsorization at ±3).

Per-factor contribution shown in the waterfall above is exactly w_i × f_i (decimal-return units), so the bars sum (with intercept) to the linear forecast point. The ensemble point combines linear / Monte Carlo / AR(1) / random-walk per per-method-comparison table.

Bias mapping (composite z-score → LONG/NEUTRAL/SHORT): weighted sum of value (1.0), quality (0.7), momentum (1.0), low-vol (0.5), revisions (1.0), news-activity (0.6); thresholds ±1.0 with macro override (risk-off + LONG → reduce to NEUTRAL; risk-on-growth + SHORT → reduce to NEUTRAL). LONG → Playbook A (long-call / call-debit-spread / covered-call); SHORT → Playbook B (long-put / put-debit-spread / bear-call-spread); NEUTRAL → cash.

Sensitivity (one-factor-at-a-time tornado above): impact = w_i × 1sd per factor (MSCI / Two-Sigma Venn convention). Stress scenarios are canned multi-factor shocks (rates +100bps; recession risk-off; quality flight).

Factor decay uses exponential half-life per factor type: catalysts 7d, news 14d, revisions 30d, momentum 45d, value 90d, quality 90d (Tetlock 2007; Cohen-Malloy-Pomorski 2012). The heatmap above shows contribution × exp(-ln(2) × t / half_life) on a 5-day grid.

Factor IC backtest: Spearman rank correlation between each factor's cross-sectional ranking on day t and the realized h-day-forward return, aggregated across the panel (Grinold-Kahn 2000 ch.4 fundamental law of active management). Source for this report: synthetic_panel_252d_100tickers_seed42 (parallel runner).

Placebo audit (v6, GT-Score): GT-score = 0.52 SPURIOUS — setup likely lacks real signal . Computed from 3 seed(s) across placebo kinds: shuffled, gaussian_iid, garch. Method: real directional accuracy = 52.1%; max placebo accuracy = 53.8%; AMG = -0.017. Source: placebo_audit_v6_ar1_runner. Provenance: arXiv 2604.15531 "Spurious Predictability in Financial ML" (Paper #3). Risk-flag spurious_predictability_audit_failed added to narrative.

Catalysts in window (30d)

No catalysts within the forecast window.

Analyst narrative

Bull case

NVS ensemble forecast is +2.51% with 80% band [-3.47%, +8.86%] over 30 days. Positive drivers: quality_score, momentum_score. 0 catalyst(s) in the window provide event-driven upside potential.

Bear case

Inter-method dispersion (+0.0251) and beats random-walk argue caution. Negative drivers: revisions_score. Macro regime risk_on_growth historically caps single-name conviction.

Synthesis

Weight the ensemble's +2.51% center against +0.0251 method dispersion. Risk On Growth regime + 0 catalyst(s) define the setup. Treat the 80% band as the working trade-sizing envelope.

Risk flags