Among the various stocks investors have on their radar today is PAVmed (NASDAQ:PAVM). Today, shares of PAVM stock are seeing precipitous declines, down more than 13% at the time of writing.
This medical devices company provides various devices used to treat carpel tunnel syndrome and a range of other diseases. Given the rising importance of cost improvements in the healthcare space, PAVmed provides investors with excellent leverage to growth in this niche sector.
Among the business segments investors have been focusing on of late is the company’s EsoCheck product line, under its subsidiary Lucid Diagnostics. Today, Lucid Diagnostics officially went public. And it wasn’t a great start to trading for this PAVmed subsidiary.
Let’s dive into what’s driving this move in PAVM stock today.
PAVM Stock Down on Disappointing Start for Lucid Diagnostics
Today, investors looking for more targeted exposure to PAVmed’s diagnostics business got their wish. The company’s subsidiary Lucid Diagnostics (NASDAQ:LUCD) went public, providing this business with $70 million of growth capital.
Unfortunately for investors in both LUCD stock and PAVM stock, this IPO hasn’t gone according to plan. Lucid Diagnostics has dropped more than 16% on its opening day, with PAVM stock feeling this decline in its own share price.
Given the unique relationship between these two companies, price action in one stock affects the other. Indeed, investors in PAVM stock appear to have been bullish on this offering. The company’s stock price, while volatile, has been moving steadily higher this year. However, today’s move provides some skepticism to the intrinsic value of PAVmed’s individual business lines.
Accordingly, whether this IPO was overpriced or not, investors are likely to keep both PAVM stock and LUCD stock on their radar right now. Where there’s volatility, there’s the ability for traders to make money. For long-term investors, deciding whether or not this is a dip worth buying is a key question today.
On the date of publication, Chris MacDonald did not have (either directly or indirectly) any positions in the securities mentioned in this article. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer, subject to the InvestorPlace.com Publishing Guidelines.