QuantAbundanciaAbundance, Quantified.

News

High-signal headlines only - macro events, earnings, M&A, regulatory. Listicles and analyst clickbait filtered out by default. Refreshed hourly.

23,210 signal articles · 362 in last 24h · 110,905 total before filter · latest 19m ago
362last 24h
2355last 7d
424● bullish (7d)
220● bearish (7d)
202publishers
AllMacro261Earnings1425M&A99Regulatory18Product16Analyst22
✕ clear all filtersticker: JNJSentiment:bullishneutralbearishshow all (incl. clickbait)
Healthcare Investing Is Now an AI Short in Disguise
The Wall Street Journal22h agoneutral
Healthcare Investing Is Now an AI Short in Disguise

For years, healthcare and semiconductor stocks weren’t particularly tied to each other. In other words, they increasingly go in opposite directions: when chips sell off, healthcare has tended to catch a bid. After years of underperformance, healthcare investors are enjoying a burst of momentum amid the recent nervousness around AI.

This Surgical Robot Could Transform the Operating Room
Bloomberg9d agoneutralVIDEO
This Surgical Robot Could Transform the Operating Room

After spending years and hundreds of millions of dollars, Johnson and Johnson has won FDA approval for its new surgical robot Ottava. Can it challenge the dominance of competitors who entered the race years earlier, or is the market already spoken for?

J&J’s biotech progress could punish its 2027 profit
TheStreet11d agoneutral
J&J’s biotech progress could punish its 2027 profit

Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) just issued one of the weirdest profit warnings in health care. The biotech business decreased its 2026 adjusted earnings guidance to between $10.96 and $11.11 a share, from a range of $11.60 to $11.75. This year, the newly closed acquisition of Firefly Bio and the ...

Johnson & Johnson proposes $5.5 billion talc settlement to end marathon legal fight
Associated Press14d agoneutral
Johnson & Johnson proposes $5.5 billion talc settlement to end marathon legal fight

Johnson & Johnson has agreed to pay $5.5 billion to tie up remaining lawsuits that claim its talc products caused ovarian cancer. The drugmaker, which has been fighting talc-related lawsuits for more than a decade, said that the settlement is conditioned on at least 95% of remaining claimants participating. A U.S. bankruptcy court judge denied a $9 billion settlement proposed by company subsidiary Red River Talc last year that would have been one of the biggest mass tort settlements in history.

Johnson & Johnson reaches $5.5 billion baby powder settlement
Reuters Videos14d agoneutralVIDEO
Johnson & Johnson reaches $5.5 billion baby powder settlement

<body><p>STORY: :: New York / July 27, 2026</p><p>:: Dietrich Knauth, Legal Reporter</p><p>"After years of litigation, about 70,000 court cases, and three bankruptcies, Johnson& Johnson has agreed to a $5.5 billion talc settlement. Why are they settling now?&nbsp;</p><p>:: Why did J&J settle after more than a decade of talc litigation?</p><p>"So tens of thousands of women have accused Johnson& Johnson of causing their ovarian cancer. They've alleged that talc-based products, including baby powder, have been contaminated with asbestos and caused them to develop cancer after using these products for a long period of time. Johnson& Johnson has denied that, but these cases have continued to go to trial."</p><p>"And after a couple of attempts to settle these cases through bankruptcy courts, Johnson& Johnson has now reached a deal where they think they can end all of these cases for an overall payment that is about $5.5 billion, although that number could rise depending on how many people participate in the settlement."</p><p>"One of the plaintiff's lawyers told me today that he thinks it's closer to $7 billion. That's not something we're going to know for some time."</p><p>:: Could J&J still face new talc lawsuits in the future?</p><p>:: Johnson & Johnson</p><p>"It does not fully close the door on all future talc litigations. Somebody could develop cancer in the future, decide that they want to file a lawsuit against Johnson& Johnson, because they think that company's product caused their cancer. The reason for that is that there's something called a latency period, which is essentially the delay between when you experience the factors that caused your cancer and when that cancer actually shows up."</p><p>"But, you know, this deal basically gets rid of all of the existing cases. That's the idea."</p><p>J&J reached the settlement after a series of wins in court, including victories in individual trials, successful efforts to disqualify plaintiffs' lawyers from the litigation, and court rulings against experts that plaintiffs had used to prove their cases in court.&nbsp;</p><p>J&J won a significant court victory in the long-running legal battle last week, when a federal judge cast doubt on individual plaintiffs' ability to prove that talc specifically caused their ovarian cancer.</p><p>J&J has long denied that its talc products caused cancer, saying that talc was safe and did not contain asbestos. The company stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the U.S. in 2020, switching to a cornstarch product.</p><p>Before the bankruptcy attempts, J&J had a mixed record in talc trials, with a multibillion verdict in favor of 22 women who said baby powder caused their ovarian cancer. The company won some trials outright and had other verdicts reduced on appeal.</p><p>Unlike the proposed bankruptcy settlements, Monday's agreement applies only to existing claims and does not address future lawsuits.</p></body>

J&J offers $5.5bn to settle baby powder lawsuits
Sky News15d agobearish
J&J offers $5.5bn to settle baby powder lawsuits

Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has offered to pay $5.5bn (£4.13bn) to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits in the US alleging its talcum powder caused ovarian cancer. The company said the settlement covers around 76,000 claims, having already settled most cases alleging its talc contained asbestos and caused mesothelioma. J&J's vice president of litigation, Erik Haas, said the move was motivated by a desire to get closure – describing the claims themselves as "meritless".