H.C. Wainwright Resumes Coverage with a Buy Rating on Acurx Pharmaceuticals (ACXP)
In a report released on May 15, Matthew Keller from H.C. Wainwright resumed coverage with a Buy rating on Acurx Pharmaceuticals (ACXP – Research Report) and a price target of $8.00. The company's shares closed yesterday at $0.39.
Confident Investing Starts Here:
Quickly and easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions
Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks straight to you inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter
According to TipRanks, Keller is an analyst with an average return of -24.9% and a 0.00% success rate. Keller covers the Healthcare sector, focusing on stocks such as FibroGen, Iterum Therapeutics, and GRI Bio.
The word on The Street in general, suggests a Strong Buy analyst consensus rating for Acurx Pharmaceuticals with a $6.17 average price target, which is a 1,494.32% upside from current levels. In a report released on May 14, Maxim Group also maintained a Buy rating on the stock with a $1.50 price target.
Based on Acurx Pharmaceuticals' latest earnings release for the quarter ending March 31, the company reported a quarterly GAAP net loss of $2.15 billion. In comparison, last year the company had a GAAP net loss of $4.38 million
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Intel engineers are developing the 'biggest, baddest CPU in the world' by targeting IPC, not clockspeed or core counts
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Intel, CPUs, and the concept of "badness" aren't necessarily things you'd want to shout about, what with numerous well-documented issues afflicting Intel's recent processors. But a new Oregon-based startup called AheadComputing is leaning hard on the Intel provenance of its founders while claiming that it is creating, "the biggest, baddest CPU in the world." And it's going to do it via IPC or instructions per clock, not cranking up the operating frequencies or throwing in more cores. That is some statement. All four of AheadComputing's founders had long careers at Intel, dating all the way back to ye olde 386 processor through to the latest Intel Core-branded chips. What's more, AheadComputing also appointed CPU design legend Jim Keller to its board in March. That's at least a vote of confidence, even if it seems unlikely Keller will be involved in the design of AheadComputing's CPUs. The company is very young, having launched in July last year with a plan to, "develop and license breakthrough, high-performance 64-bit RISC-V processor cores." RISC-V, of course, is an open-source instruction set that exists to present a more modern and cost effective alternative to the proprietary x86 and Arm standards. Currently, RISC-V chips tend to be found in embedded applications and commercial devices. RISC-V has yet to make much of an impact in PCs or phones, for instance. Exactly how AheadComputing is going to deliver on that promise of the "biggest, baddest CPU in the world" isn't totally clear beyond the focus in IPC. It's a fabless startup, which means it won't manufacture chips itself. But then the likes of AMD and Nvidia are fabless, too. It's really only Intel that designs and manufactures its own chips, and that business is coming under increasing pressure. According to AheadComputing's CEO Debbie Marr, "the x86 ecosystem is fiercely defending its territory but is destined to lose in the end." As for Arm, she says, "we anticipate that the ARM ecosystem will experience considerable strain in the coming years. If ARM's current customers are pressured excessively, they will consider transitioning to an alternative architecture like RISC-V." In response, AheadComputing claims it will, "demonstrate leadership in CPU performance and performance per watt in a very short timeframe and start building the second generation of products that will demonstrate our commitment to a roadmap with large gains in performance generation over generation." AheadComputing says it will achieve that via IPC, or instructions processed per clock, as opposed to operating frequency or adding cores. "If the performance and efficiency from the multi-core scaling era are slowing down, then it's time for the CPU designers to find a different way to use the additional gates from new process technologies. CPU designers must look towards IPC. This will require increasing the functions for each core rather than increasing the number of cores. If we do this intelligently, AheadComputing will provide performance improvements regardless of workload parallelism," says co-founder Jonathan Pearce. That latter point could be critical. When Intel's plans for 10 GHz-plus computing hit the wall towards the latter end of the 2000's, the company dramatically changed tack in favour of multi-core computing as a way to add performance in the absence of substantial clockspeed improvements. The problem with adding cores is that it relies on multi-threaded workloads. That's fine for many tasks, like 3D rendering. But it's not a magic bullet for every computational task. Indeed, that's why AMD's eight-core Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the weapon of choice for PC gaming, currently. Adding another eight cores in the form of the Ryzen 9 9950X3D typically doesn't do a whole lot for gaming performance. Whatever, aside from that focus on IPC as opposed to adding cores, AheadComputing isn't going into any detail. For sure, it will be years before the company's CPU core designs have any chance of showing up in a device you can actually buy. Your next upgrade Best CPU for gaming: The top chips from Intel and gaming motherboard: The right graphics card: Your perfect pixel-pusher SSD for gaming: Get into the game ahead of the rest. But the focus on IPC is still interesting. Right now, Apple's M Series CPUs offer the best IPC in a consumer chip by absolutely miles. The latest M4 easily outperforms anything from Intel or AMD when it comes to a single software thread, despite running at significantly lower clockspeeds. Metrics vary, but the M4 probably has a lead of at least 30% in terms of pure IPC versus the best AMD and Intel CPUs, and quite possibly more. Personally, if you offered me a CPU with either 50% more IPC or 50% more cores, I'd take the IPC every time. That will deliver in almost any circumstance, while multi-core CPUs can be a bit more hit and miss. Aiming for improved IPC also tends to make for better efficiency, which is great for mobile PCs. Anywho, for now we'll have to chalk AheadComputing down as a slow burn. The company has strong provenance, but it's anyone's guess as to whether it will, in reality, make an impact. My best guess is that if it manages to come up with an interesting core design, it'll get snapped up by one of the big boys, just as the startup Nuvia was bought by Qualcomm and its Oryon CPU cores ended up in the new Snapdragon X chips. And all of that is before you even begin to ponder the odds of any RiSC-V chip making an impact on the PC. Industry watchers have been predicting Arm chips would take over the PC for decades. That still hasn't happened.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Intel engineers are developing the 'biggest, baddest CPU in the world' by targeting IPC, not clockspeed or core counts
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Intel, CPUs, and the concept of "badness" aren't necessarily things you'd want to shout about, what with numerous well-documented issues afflicting Intel's recent processors. But a new Oregon-based startup called AheadComputing is leaning hard on the Intel provenance of its founders while claiming that it is creating, "the biggest, baddest CPU in the world." And it's going to do it via IPC or instructions per clock, not cranking up the operating frequencies or throwing in more cores. That is some statement. All four of AheadComputing's founders had long careers at Intel, dating all the way back to ye olde 386 processor through to the latest Intel Core-branded chips. What's more, AheadComputing also appointed CPU design legend Jim Keller to its board in March. That's at least a vote of confidence, even if it seems unlikely Keller will be involved in the design of AheadComputing's CPUs. The company is very young, having launched in July last year with a plan to, "develop and license breakthrough, high-performance 64-bit RISC-V processor cores." RISC-V, of course, is an open-source instruction set that exists to present a more modern and cost effective alternative to the proprietary x86 and Arm standards. Currently, RISC-V chips tend to be found in embedded applications and commercial devices. RISC-V has yet to make much of an impact in PCs or phones, for instance. Exactly how AheadComputing is going to deliver on that promise of the "biggest, baddest CPU in the world" isn't totally clear beyond the focus in IPC. It's a fabless startup, which means it won't manufacture chips itself. But then the likes of AMD and Nvidia are fabless, too. It's really only Intel that designs and manufactures its own chips, and that business is coming under increasing pressure. According to AheadComputing's CEO Debbie Marr, "the x86 ecosystem is fiercely defending its territory but is destined to lose in the end." As for Arm, she says, "we anticipate that the ARM ecosystem will experience considerable strain in the coming years. If ARM's current customers are pressured excessively, they will consider transitioning to an alternative architecture like RISC-V." In response, AheadComputing claims it will, "demonstrate leadership in CPU performance and performance per watt in a very short timeframe and start building the second generation of products that will demonstrate our commitment to a roadmap with large gains in performance generation over generation." AheadComputing says it will achieve that via IPC, or instructions processed per clock, as opposed to operating frequency or adding cores. "If the performance and efficiency from the multi-core scaling era are slowing down, then it's time for the CPU designers to find a different way to use the additional gates from new process technologies. CPU designers must look towards IPC. This will require increasing the functions for each core rather than increasing the number of cores. If we do this intelligently, AheadComputing will provide performance improvements regardless of workload parallelism," says co-founder Jonathan Pearce. That latter point could be critical. When Intel's plans for 10 GHz-plus computing hit the wall towards the latter end of the 2000's, the company dramatically changed tack in favour of multi-core computing as a way to add performance in the absence of substantial clockspeed improvements. The problem with adding cores is that it relies on multi-threaded workloads. That's fine for many tasks, like 3D rendering. But it's not a magic bullet for every computational task. Indeed, that's why AMD's eight-core Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the weapon of choice for PC gaming, currently. Adding another eight cores in the form of the Ryzen 9 9950X3D typically doesn't do a whole lot for gaming performance. Whatever, aside from that focus on IPC as opposed to adding cores, AheadComputing isn't going into any detail. For sure, it will be years before the company's CPU core designs have any chance of showing up in a device you can actually buy. Your next upgrade Best CPU for gaming: The top chips from Intel and gaming motherboard: The right graphics card: Your perfect pixel-pusher SSD for gaming: Get into the game ahead of the rest. But the focus on IPC is still interesting. Right now, Apple's M Series CPUs offer the best IPC in a consumer chip by absolutely miles. The latest M4 easily outperforms anything from Intel or AMD when it comes to a single software thread, despite running at significantly lower clockspeeds. Metrics vary, but the M4 probably has a lead of at least 30% in terms of pure IPC versus the best AMD and Intel CPUs, and quite possibly more. Personally, if you offered me a CPU with either 50% more IPC or 50% more cores, I'd take the IPC every time. That will deliver in almost any circumstance, while multi-core CPUs can be a bit more hit and miss. Aiming for improved IPC also tends to make for better efficiency, which is great for mobile PCs. Anywho, for now we'll have to chalk AheadComputing down as a slow burn. The company has strong provenance, but it's anyone's guess as to whether it will, in reality, make an impact. My best guess is that if it manages to come up with an interesting core design, it'll get snapped up by one of the big boys, just as the startup Nuvia was bought by Qualcomm and its Oryon CPU cores ended up in the new Snapdragon X chips. And all of that is before you even begin to ponder the odds of any RiSC-V chip making an impact on the PC. Industry watchers have been predicting Arm chips would take over the PC for decades. That still hasn't happened.
Business Insider
2 hours ago
- Business Insider
Petra Capital Sticks to Its Buy Rating for Silver Mines Limited (SWQ)
Petra Capital analyst Andrew Richards CFA maintained a Buy rating on Silver Mines Limited (SWQ – Research Report) today and set a price target of A$0.17. The company's shares closed last Tuesday at €0.08. Confident Investing Starts Here: Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter According to TipRanks, Richards CFA is a 4-star analyst with an average return of 25.4% and an 88.24% success rate. Richards CFA covers the Basic Materials sector, focusing on stocks such as Medallion Metals Ltd, Silver Mines Limited, and Metro Mining Limited. Silver Mines Limited has an analyst consensus of Moderate Buy, with a price target consensus of €0.10.
