When the market keeps climbing but certain stocks lag behind, it is tempting to assume investors have overlooked a bargain. 📉 Yet a lower share price does not automatically mean a company is undervalued. Sometimes the market is overreacting to temporary concerns. Other times, falling prices reflect genuine problems that could take years to resolve.

Four companies highlighted by Alec Green, chief investment strategist at The Oxford Club, illustrate how different these situations can be: MercadoLibre (MELI), Novo Nordisk (NVO), Tyler Technologies (TYL), and Summit Therapeutics (SMMT). MercadoLibre is working to expand its e-commerce and financial services ecosystem across Latin America, while Novo Nordisk faces intensifying competition in obesity treatments. Tyler Technologies offers exposure to specialized government software and the potential for AI-driven improvements, whereas Summit Therapeutics carries much greater uncertainty because its investment case depends on clinical and regulatory progress. For a busy investor, the key is not finding the stock that has fallen the furthest. It is identifying which businesses can still deliver on their long-term potential at a reasonable price.

🔎 One company is building a financial ecosystem across Latin America, while another could face a sharp change in fortunes based on cancer-drug developments.

Explore the business catalysts, warning signs, and three essential questions that can help determine whether a stock's decline deserves a closer look.

Imagine setting aside $500 a month for PLTR for five years, buying a fixed dollar amount on a schedule, a method called dollar-cost averaging. In our example, the buy happens on the first trading day on or after the 27th of each month, from Oct 27, 2021 through Sep 28, 2026: 60 buys, $30,000 in total.

Caution: past pace rarely continues. PLTR sits about 6% below its Oct 9, 2026 closing high of $209.05 and trades at a rich valuation, so its next checkpoint, Q3 2026 results on Monday, Nov 2 after the US close, can move the price sharply in either direction. Price only; an example, not a forecast or advice.

When the market is rising, it can be frustrating to watch your portfolio struggle while a handful of popular stocks continue to attract most of the attention. You may see the major indexes near record levels and wonder why some of the companies you own are barely moving, even when their businesses appear to be performing well.

That disconnect is at the center of today's investment opportunity. Market gains can become concentrated in a small group of large companies, leaving other businesses overlooked despite having credible growth prospects. When investors crowd into the same stocks, companies with attractive earnings potential can temporarily fall out of favor.

But buying a dip requires more than spotting a red chart. A declining share price might reflect temporary pessimism, weaker earnings expectations, intensifying competition, or a business that is no longer worth what investors once believed. The challenge is determining which explanation fits the company you are considering.

Four stocks discussed by Alec Green, chief investment strategist at The Oxford Club, illustrate different ways to approach this problem: MercadoLibre (MELI), Novo Nordisk (NVO), Tyler Technologies (TYL), and Summit Therapeutics (SMMT). Their opportunities span international e-commerce, obesity treatments, government software, and experimental cancer therapies.

These are not four versions of the same investment. Some have established businesses and existing revenue streams, while another depends heavily on clinical and regulatory developments. Understanding those differences matters more than simply buying whichever stock has fallen the furthest.

MercadoLibre is often described as the Amazon of Latin America, but its investment opportunity extends beyond online shopping. The company operates an e-commerce marketplace and a financial technology ecosystem that includes payments and other services through Mercado Pago.

Its regional presence gives it exposure to a market where digital commerce and financial services continue to develop. Consumers and businesses can use its platform to buy and sell products, while its payments ecosystem supports transactions and other financial activities. These businesses can reinforce one another: more marketplace activity can support payments adoption, while broader financial services can make the platform more useful to merchants and consumers.

That combination is important because MercadoLibre is not relying on a single product to drive its long-term growth. It is building an interconnected platform in which commerce, payments, and financial services can expand together.

So why would a company with these opportunities experience a disappointing stretch in its share price?

One concern highlighted in the discussion was pressure on profit margins. When a company invests heavily in logistics, customer acquisition, shipping subsidies, or financial services, its near-term profitability can weaken even if revenue continues to grow. Investors may become concerned that these costs will persist longer than expected or that the company will struggle to convert sales growth into stronger earnings.

However, spending on expansion is not automatically a negative. The important distinction is whether those investments create durable competitive advantages and generate sufficient returns over time.

For MercadoLibre, the long-term opportunity depends on continued e-commerce adoption, greater engagement with its financial services, and its ability to grow profitably across Latin America. Its regional position may provide advantages that international competitors would find difficult to replicate, including established customer relationships and a developed local ecosystem.

International diversification adds another dimension to the investment case. Owning a business outside the United States can provide exposure to different consumer markets, economic conditions, and currencies. That diversification can be useful when US stocks face pressure, although foreign investments also introduce risks involving exchange rates, local regulation, political developments, and economic instability.

For an investor with limited time, MercadoLibre deserves consideration based on its long-term business performance rather than a short-term price decline. Revenue growth, operating margins, credit quality within its financial services operations, and cash generation can help reveal whether the company is strengthening its position or sacrificing too much profitability to expand.

The central question is whether the market is underestimating the long-term value of its ecosystem or correctly anticipating a more difficult path to profitable growth. The share price alone cannot settle that question.

Novo Nordisk is one of the major companies in the market for GLP-1 medicines, which have changed the treatment landscape for obesity and type 2 diabetes. Its products include Wegovy for weight management and Ozempic for type 2 diabetes, with the latter also associated with weight loss.

The broader opportunity is substantial. Obesity is linked to numerous health complications, including cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Treatments that help patients manage their weight can therefore address a significant medical need, creating potential demand across multiple countries and healthcare systems.

Yet a large market does not guarantee that every company competing within it will succeed equally.

Novo Nordisk faces competition from Eli Lilly, whose products have become major alternatives in the obesity and diabetes treatment markets. Differences in weight-loss results, tolerability, dosing, availability, pricing, and insurance coverage can influence which treatments patients receive and which products physicians prescribe.

This competition is one reason investors need to look beyond the overall popularity of GLP-1 medicines. Even if the total market expands, Novo Nordisk must defend its market share, maintain attractive pricing, and develop products that remain competitive.

The investment discussion also highlighted disappointing earnings results and concerns about the company's ability to compete with newer or more effective treatments. These are meaningful issues because a stock can decline for legitimate reasons even when its underlying industry continues to grow.

Novo Nordisk's longer-term prospects depend on more than Wegovy alone. Its research pipeline, manufacturing capacity, access to international markets, and ability to make treatments more accessible will all influence its future performance. Greater supply and broader insurance coverage could support adoption, but pricing pressure and reimbursement restrictions could limit the financial benefits.

There is also a difference between medical potential and proven commercial outcomes. Claims about possible benefits beyond established indications should be evaluated through reliable clinical evidence and relevant regulatory decisions, rather than treated as guaranteed future revenue opportunities.

The source discussion characterized Novo Nordisk as potentially inexpensive relative to its earnings and highlighted its dividend. Those points should be verified against current financial results, the latest share price, and the company's dividend policy before being used to make an investment decision. A low valuation can indicate an opportunity, but it can also reflect expectations for slower growth or lower future profitability.

For a long-term investor, the key question is whether Novo Nordisk can translate the continuing need for obesity treatment into sustainable earnings growth despite intensifying competition. If the company retains a strong position and executes well, a period of pessimism could prove excessive. If competitors capture more demand or pricing deteriorates, the stock could remain under pressure even in a growing market.

Tyler Technologies operates in a less glamorous but essential part of the technology industry: software used by government organizations.

Its products support functions such as public administration, court operations, public safety, financial management, and other government processes. These systems help agencies manage information, coordinate workflows, and provide services to residents.

The business model has an important characteristic that can be attractive to long-term investors. Government organizations often rely on specialized software for critical operations, and replacing established systems can involve significant costs, implementation work, employee training, and operational disruption.

As a result, successful government software providers may benefit from long customer relationships and recurring revenue. Once a platform is integrated into an agency's daily operations, a customer may have substantial reasons to continue using it, provided the software remains reliable and meets its needs.

This does not mean government contracts are guaranteed or that customers cannot switch providers. Public-sector purchasing decisions can be lengthy, budgets can be constrained, and implementations can face delays. However, the specialized nature of the market can create a different competitive environment from consumer software, where customers may switch products more easily.

Tyler Technologies also presents an interesting question about artificial intelligence. Investors have become concerned that AI tools could disrupt traditional software businesses by automating tasks that previously required specialized applications. That concern has weighed on parts of the software sector.

But the impact of AI will not be identical across every company.

For a provider such as Tyler Technologies, AI could potentially improve document processing, data analysis, administrative workflows, and the way government employees interact with software. At the same time, the company must ensure that new capabilities meet requirements involving data security, privacy, reliability, and public-sector accountability.

The distinction is between software that AI might replace and software that AI could make more useful. Tyler's specialized workflows and established relationships may help it defend its position, but its long-term success will depend on how effectively it adapts to technological change.

The source discussion pointed to the company's earnings as a reason to look beyond its share-price weakness. That is a useful starting point, but investors should review the latest results to determine whether revenue, operating margins, recurring revenue, and cash flow support the investment thesis.

For someone who wants technology exposure without depending entirely on semiconductor demand or speculative AI applications, Tyler Technologies offers a different angle. Its growth opportunity comes from the modernization of essential public services, combined with the possibility of making established software more capable.

The question is whether the company can continue growing while adapting to new technology and maintaining the customer relationships that underpin its business. If it can, a period of concern about traditional software may create an opportunity. If its competitive position weakens, a lower share price alone will not make it attractive.

Summit Therapeutics stands apart from the other three companies because its investment case is much more dependent on clinical evidence and regulatory decisions.

The company has been developing ivonescimab, an investigational treatment being studied for certain cancers, including non-small cell lung cancer. The drug combines mechanisms involving PD-1 and VEGF, two biological targets relevant to cancer treatment.

The interest in ivonescimab reflects the enormous medical need for effective lung cancer therapies and the commercial significance of the existing immunotherapy market. Merck's Keytruda, for example, is an established treatment used in several cancer indications. A new therapy that demonstrates meaningful benefits for appropriate patients could compete for a portion of that market.

However, Summit's opportunity should not be confused with a proven commercial outcome. Clinical results must be interpreted in context, including the patient population studied, the trial design, the comparison treatment, the magnitude of the benefit, and the treatment's safety profile.

Regulatory approval is another separate hurdle. Results from studies conducted in China do not automatically establish that a treatment will be approved in the United States. The US Food and Drug Administration evaluates the evidence submitted for the relevant application and determines whether the benefits and risks support approval for the proposed use.

The source discussion identified an anticipated FDA decision around mid-November and additional clinical developments as potential catalysts. Those dates and expectations reflect the discussion's original timeframe and should not be assumed to represent the current regulatory status. Before investing, it is essential to check Summit's latest company announcements and official FDA information to establish whether a decision has occurred, been delayed, or remains pending.

This distinction is particularly important because a stock can move sharply before and after clinical or regulatory announcements. If expectations are high, even a positive development may produce a disappointing market reaction. Conversely, an unfavorable result or regulatory setback can cause a substantial decline.

Summit was described in the discussion as a pre-revenue, speculative investment. That makes its financial position especially important. Investors should assess its cash balance, research and development expenses, expected funding needs, and the possibility of future share issuance. A promising drug does not eliminate the risk that existing shareholders may experience dilution while the company funds further development.

The source also discussed the involvement of experienced biotech investors. Such participation may attract attention, but it does not establish that a clinical trial will succeed or that a stock is appropriately valued.

For investors who understand biotechnology and can tolerate substantial losses, Summit may represent a high-risk opportunity tied to identifiable research and regulatory milestones. It is not an equivalent substitute for an established, profitable business.

A cautious approach means deciding in advance how much capital can reasonably be exposed to a binary event. It also means recognizing that a potential short-term catalyst is not the same as a long-term investment thesis. Even if a treatment succeeds, commercial adoption, manufacturing, pricing, competition, and additional clinical evidence will determine how much value ultimately reaches shareholders.

MercadoLibre, Novo Nordisk, Tyler Technologies, and Summit Therapeutics demonstrate why a falling stock price should trigger research rather than an automatic purchase.

MercadoLibre's opportunity is tied to the expansion of e-commerce and financial services across Latin America. Novo Nordisk depends on its ability to compete in a rapidly developing obesity-treatment market. Tyler Technologies focuses on specialized government software that could benefit from continued modernization and carefully implemented AI. Summit Therapeutics offers a much more speculative possibility centered on an investigational cancer treatment.

Their differences matter because each company requires a different way of evaluating risk. A margin slowdown at MercadoLibre should be examined through its growth investments and operating performance. Novo Nordisk needs to be assessed against competitive drug results, pricing, and future product development. Tyler requires attention to recurring revenue, customer retention, and technological adaptation. Summit demands close monitoring of clinical evidence, regulatory milestones, and funding requirements.

The wider market can create opportunities when investors concentrate on a limited number of popular stocks. However, a broad market advance does not mean every neglected company is undervalued, and a stock trading below its previous high is not necessarily cheap.

A useful strategy is to focus on the relationship between business performance and price. If a company's long-term prospects remain intact while its valuation becomes more reasonable, a pullback may offer a better entry point. If the business outlook has deteriorated, the decline may be a warning rather than an invitation.

International diversification can also broaden the range of opportunities available to a portfolio. MercadoLibre and Novo Nordisk provide exposure to businesses operating across international markets, while Tyler and Summit bring different US-listed business and research risks. Nevertheless, geographic diversification alone does not guarantee protection when market sentiment turns negative, and currency exposure can affect returns.

For an investor who does not have hours each day to follow the market, the goal should not be to trade every dip. A focused watchlist, a few clear measures of business performance, and predetermined limits on risk can make the process more manageable.

Before purchasing any of these stocks, consider three questions.

First, has the company's underlying business weakened, or has the share price fallen primarily because of market sentiment? The answer requires reviewing recent earnings, management guidance, competitive developments, and the reasons investors have become less optimistic.

Second, what needs to happen for the investment to work over the next three to five years? MercadoLibre needs to sustain profitable expansion, Novo Nordisk must remain competitive, Tyler Technologies needs to preserve and develop its software position, and Summit must produce the clinical and regulatory outcomes required to advance its treatment.

Third, what happens if the thesis proves wrong? This is where position sizing, diversification, and an honest assessment of risk become essential. A speculative biotechnology stock should not automatically receive the same portfolio allocation as an established company with recurring revenue and a more mature business model.

A trailing stop-loss can help some investors manage downside or protect gains, but it is not a guarantee against losses. For example, a 25% trailing stop generally places a sell-stop level 25% below the highest price reached after the order is established or adjusted. If triggered, execution can occur below that level during a sharp decline or a price gap. Investors should also consider whether short-term price fluctuations make such a rule unsuitable for their strategy.

Do not buy a stock simply because it is down 30%, 50%, or more from its high. Identify the reason for the decline, establish what would demonstrate that the business is recovering, and decide how much you can afford to risk before placing an order.

The most valuable opportunities often require patience, but patience should never mean ignoring deteriorating fundamentals. MercadoLibre, Novo Nordisk, Tyler Technologies, and Summit Therapeutics each offer a distinct investment case, and none is guaranteed to recover simply because the market has become pessimistic.

The real advantage comes from knowing what you own, understanding what could change its future, and paying a price that leaves room for uncertainty. You do not need to catch every market bottom to build wealth over time. You need a process that helps you distinguish a temporary setback from a lasting problem and gives your strongest investment ideas enough time to prove themselves.

Ready to Revolutionize Your Wealth?

Here's what's waiting for you:

As the world becomes increasingly digital, this question will be on the minds of millions seeking new income streams in 2026.

The answer is—Absolutely!

Thank you for taking the time to read this email! Your support is what allows me to send out this newsletter for free every day.

 What do you think of the new format? Please provide your feedback in the poll below, and if you find the newsletter valuable, feel free to share it with other investors!

Disclaimer: This newsletter is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Please consult with a financial advisor before making any investment decisions.