Ophthotech's (OPHT) — Earnings Call X-Ray
Our AI read all 13 of OPHT's earnings calls (2016–2019) and answered the same battery of questions about each one. Every past call is free; the newest quarter unlocks with a free account.
Previous Call Grade
C+
Q3 2018
Calls Analyzed
13
2016–2019
Avg Candor
6/9
evasion 4.2/9
Call-by-call analysis
🔒 Q4 2018 earnings call
2019-02-26
NEWEST
Guidance: ■■■■■Demand: ■■■■■■
Margins: ■■■■Backlog: ■■■■
■ analysts, ■■ questionsexpected move ±■■%
Management ■■■■■■ guidance against ■■■■■■■■ demand and ■■■■■■■ margins. The delivery was ■■■■■■■■ and ■■■■ in specifics, with ■■■ questions left hanging.
🔒 The Q4 2018 call grade is ready
The full 37-point AI read of OPHT's newest earnings call — grade, expected move, and every question answered — is free with an account.
Sign up free to unlock
C+
Q3 2018 earnings call
2018-10-31
Management raised guidance. The delivery was unusually candid, rich in specifics, relaxed under questioning.
Guidance: raised 2 analysts · 6 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging✓ Guidance underwritable⚑ Reads rehearsedDirection beats results
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
YES Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
YES Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
NO Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
YES Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
YES Is consolidation happening among their peers?
NO Is a founder still running the company?
NO Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
D
Q2 2018 earnings call
2018-08-01
Management held guidance steady.
Guidance: maintained 2 analysts · 4 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging✓ Guidance underwritable⚑ Reads rehearsed
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
YES Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
NO Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
YES Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
YES Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
NO Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
NO Is a founder still running the company?
NO Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
C
Q1 2018 earnings call
2018-05-09
Management held guidance steady. The delivery was rich in specifics, relaxed under questioning.
Guidance: maintained 2 analysts · 3 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging✓ Guidance underwritable⚑ Reads rehearsed
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
YES Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
YES Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
NO Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
NO Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
NO Is a founder still running the company?
NO Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
D
Q4 2017 earnings call
2018-02-27
Management held guidance steady. The delivery was unusually candid, rich in specifics.
Guidance: maintainedHeadcount: flatCapex: increasing 2 analysts · 6 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging✓ Guidance underwritable⚑ Reads rehearsedDirection beats results
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
YES Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
NO Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
NO Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
YES Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
NO Is a founder still running the company?
NO Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
F
Q3 2017 earnings call
2017-11-08
Management gave no formal guidance against contracting margins. The delivery was promotional in tone.
Margins: contractingHeadcount: cutting 1 analysts · 2 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging⚑ Reads rehearsedFounder-ledDirection beats results
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
NO Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
NO Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
NO Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
YES Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
YES Is a founder still running the company?
NO Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
D
Q2 2017 earnings call
2017-07-26
Management held guidance steady. The delivery was unusually candid, promotional in tone.
Guidance: maintainedHeadcount: cutting 5 analysts · 13 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging✓ Guidance underwritable✓ Prepayments growing⚑ Reads rehearsedFounder-led
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
YES Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
NO Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
YES Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
YES Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
YES Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
YES Is a founder still running the company?
YES Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
F
Q1 2017 earnings call
2017-05-03
Management gave no formal guidance against contracting margins. The delivery was frequently evasive.
Margins: contractingHeadcount: cuttingCapex: decreasing 3 analysts · 7 questions
⚑ Critic ammunition⚑ Question left hanging⚑ Reads rehearsedFounder-led
All 20 questions our AI answered about this call
NO Would a skeptical short-seller find this call reassuring?
NO Would a careful investor underwrite management's guidance?
YES Is management's confidence proportionate to the evidence presented?
NO Does the call resolve more doubts than it creates?
YES Is there something a critic could fairly use against the company?
NO Is a claimed advantage dependent on scale they lack?
YES Does an obvious question remain unanswered?
NO Is a product early in its life but growing very fast?
NO Do they serve a small fraction of their addressable customers?
NO Is volume about to step up rather than grow gradually?
YES Are high fixed costs currently underutilised?
NO Is pricing recovering from a depressed level?
NO Do current results look bad while the direction looks better?
NO Are deferred revenue or customer prepayments growing?
NO Is consolidation happening among their peers?
YES Is a founder still running the company?
YES Does the final speaker sound like they are summarizing a finished story?
NO Is a fast-growing segment obscured by a declining one?
NO Does the CFO speak more than the CEO?
YES Does the call read rehearsed rather than lived?
Earlier calls
| Call | Date | Grade | Guidance | Demand | Margins | Candor | Evasion |
|---|
| Q4 2016 |
2017-02-28 |
F |
withdrawn | slowing | contracting |
7/9 |
5/9 |
| Q3 2016 |
2016-11-08 |
F |
none | unclear | contracting |
5/9 |
7/9 |
| Q2 2016 |
2016-08-03 |
F |
none | unclear | contracting |
6/9 |
5/9 |
| Q1 2016 |
2016-05-04 |
F |
none | unclear | contracting |
5/9 |
5/9 |
| Q4 2015 |
2016-02-24 |
F |
none | unclear | contracting |
5/9 |
4/9 |
How to read this page
The grade is a transparent composite of call quality — candor, specificity, low evasion, low stress, whether the call resolves more doubts than it creates, and the guidance action — not a buy or sell signal. The expected move is a volatility estimate from the one signal that survived our out-of-sample tests: how a stock's own reaction and pre-call volatility predict the size (not direction) of its next move. Full detail, including everything that failed: methodology.
Companies with similar call quality
← OPHLF All “O” companies
OPI →
Not investment advice. Artul.ai publishes AI-generated earnings-call quality grades and expected-volatility estimates — never buy or sell recommendations. We tested over 1,600 predictive hypotheses against 165,000 transcripts; the honest result, including what failed, is documented in our
methodology.