I'm taking a week off from stocks and message boards, since I'm already vested and don't plan on buying or selling for a while, even if Fragile X results are announced.
The technicals here (and almost every biotech) are a train wreck. Every indicator says sell.
The fundamentals here, however, are excellent, based on sound science, and positive clues such as the impressive new hires in December, Oppenheimer comments, and clues that Fragile X results might be good.
Anyway, I have found it helpful in the past to take breaks periodically. I could sure use one now in this rough market!
Yes FLXN is a good buy here too.
Funny, other than IDRA, I've got a completely different list of bio stocks that I follow as compared to last year. I used to follow CYTR, SYN, SNTA, MNKD, KERX, GALE, and MACK. I've crossed all of them off my list, although MACK has great potential, and perhaps KERX is a good buy now.
Yes, I wouldn't touch that stock. Something isn't right with NVIV.
Even with IDRA, I am not totally confident with -8400. Lymphoma trial is high risk. Same with PM/DM. I think you need to own now at the current great price but also keep dry powder just in case 8400 fails, and then load the boat completely. (I am gun-shy now about cancer and immunology trials, with recent failures in SNTA, THLD, XOMA and others.)
MRNS, IDRA, FOMX, and XNCR are my favorites now. Maybe EDGE too.
Biotrader-- I think Idera is a powerhouse in the making, but it'll be a long slog, especially in the cancer and immunology space. The GSO platform will be amazing.
On the other hand, I love the simplicity of MRNS. Their drug is an analogue of a natural chemical in our brain, so likely very safe with no surprise adverse events. Second, it's in a good biotech space now--CNS-- perhaps the biggest unmet need, which includes epilespy, not to mention depression and other indications. Third, it has relatively short, quick, quantifiable trials... either it stops seizures or it doesn't. Easy to recruit too. Compare that to the cumbersome NVIV, for example. Fourth, it has orphan status-- longer patent, etc. Fifth, it likely has many possible uses-- look at SAGE trials to get an idea. Get approval for one use, and it'll be used off-label for all others. Also, Fragile X-- which I expect to be positive-- is a bonus. Much higher incidence than Fabry's (look at FOLD) and DMD ( look at SRPT). Imagine what positive results will do to out share price.
Well, Bio, I don't think we'll get another QE. The Fed is hell-bent on raising interest rates more this year, no matter what. They're at war with Wall Street and won't give in. That's my guess. They want to show who's boss.
Anyway, even in a bad market, a few select biotechs could do fine if they report good results and are
priced right. Investors still know that they are practically the only lottery ticket left that can make good money. But you have to stick with low market cap ones that have more upside than downside potential (like MRNS and IDRA), as opposed to the KITE's out there.
I listen to oldies on satellite radio while driving every day. Nothing makes me smile more than when an EWF song is played. Their music had an unmatched joy. And I've heard that their concerts were amazing. They could really rock.
Jeremy Grantham in his just released quarterly newsletter doesn't believe we are ready for the BIG correction yet. He expects a blow-off top first. He doesn't predict the short term low in our current drop, but he expects the low energy and commodity prices to be a great tailwind which will creat surprise growth and the S&P to surge to at least 2300 before "the BIG correction". (Perhaps the blow-off top will occur after euphoria from a GOP presidential victory, peaking in 2017)
Just one person's opinion.
Another way to look at it: Within the last year, IBB went from 400 down to 251 (so far), but the XBI went from 91 down to 46, close to 50% down! Small cap bios have been hit harder and are nearer the bottom than the bigger bios.
The biotech stocks on the IBB are by definition bigger, more successful, and include some high fliers. But IDRA is more typical of those on the XBI, the smaller caps. And if you look at the Fib on the XBI, we are much closer to the 68% retracement. Low of 14, high of 91, so a 62% retracement is about an XBI of 43. It's now at 48. The small cap biotechs have been hammered harder already, and will be the first to turn around.
Nice buys! I might go for more if we drop to the $4's, but will probably hold off. I'd like to keep my large cash position in this current market!
I agree that IDRA is way more diversified and has a lot of shots on goal.
Nonetheless, I am nervous about the IMO-8400 Lymphoma trial results due out the next few months. Cancer trials have a very high failure rate. So I am still not totally sold on 8400 yet. If the TLR drugs are that good, why is there no launch or partner yet for 9200? Bring on GSO!!!!
Yes, poor results are priced in. Also, everyone is risk averse and skiddish in general now in the biotech sector and not holding through results...look at CLDX!
Anyway, the daily volume is still very low, so I don't think any of the large holders are selling. Easy to drip the price down with the volume this low.
That would make me even more skeptical about investing in SAGE's drug, even if/when it's approved. Where's the exclusivity?
It was the same argument with SYN's Trimesta (which didn't work anyway). It's Estriol, which is available commercially. So even if successful trial, would they lose out to generic/black market formulation?...
Here's what I know:
Sage-547 is allopregnanolone... it's their proprietary IV formulation
Ganaxolone is allopregnanolone with a molecular substitution which makes it available orally and prevents it from metabolizing into an active steroid (making it safe for long term usage without steroid side effects)
The Ganaxolone trial was for kids with Fragile X. These kids have autism and are in bad shape, so even though the trial was blinded, everybody knew early on whether the drug worked or not.
The Allopregnanolone trial just was initiated for adults with Fragile X in November. SAGE-547 was not mentioned, so it's unclear if SAGE supplied the drug or if it's commercially available.
The UC Davis Center is the site for both trials. I will find out the answer to your other questions.
I still contend that they wouldn't waste time and money studying Allopregnanolone if Ganaxolone didn't do well.
I think the answer to your contrarian view might be that Ganax has already proved itself for Fragile X (if results are positive). They're in. But Sage-547 is not, so they need to do this trial.
If Ganax didn't work, I don't think they would do another trial with a drug with essentially the same MOA.