Enanta Pharmaceuticals Inc (ENTA) 시세

The boards getting cocky ;)

I'll be impressed once the PPS gets back above $40.00, just sayin.

My sentiment exactly
The 75 percent move from 4.8 looks impressive but not when you realize the MC went from 100M to 175M (ballpark). A 75M increase is really not much

Yawn 🥱

We are about half of cash equivalent value now and highly likely a RSV deal coming in next few months.

Really no where close to fair value.

Wake me up when we are at least double from here ;)

Hype!

Not the latest, however, as of January 31st there were 3.3M shorts outstanding with 9 days to cover. Obviously, this rise is now producing a short squeeze. Along with other positives mentioned, the move UP should continue.
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/enta/short-interest

BTW - Baby Flo had .01 shares at the end of January. Since he is BROKE & would like to purchase an even 100 ENTA shares. Does anyone have JBOG's bank address for a loan? .

Nice😎

"The patent invalidation for their Hepatitis C drug." I have used Chat quite a bit, it makes mistakes all of the time. It can generate an autonomous response but it is not always intelligent.

Thx for sharing
have a nice weekend as well

JNJ had a fusion inhibitor that got dropped after lackluster results in phase 2 (peds data is published adult data reportedly not good as well)
They had an RSV vaccine that had good phase 2b data but company halted development in or after phase 3 I forget exact timing.
Not sure how interested they would be to get back into the RSV game but they certainly are heavy into immunology

Re: RSV deal - ChatGPT - Part 2

Then it tried to tailor this further based on Enanta’s financials and strategic goals. Obviously, some mistakes in the response... but still think its response is quite good and does provide some values.


Enanta Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: ENTA) is a clinical-stage biotechnology company specializing in small molecule drugs for viral infections and liver diseases. As of February 15, 2025, ENTA's stock is trading at $7.14, with an intraday high of $7.64 and a low of $7.10.

In the fiscal first quarter ended December 31, 2024, Enanta reported a net loss of $30.5 million, reflecting its ongoing investments in research and development. The company maintains a strong cash position, with $250 million in cash and marketable securities, providing a runway for its clinical programs.

Strategically, Enanta is focused on advancing its pipeline in virology and immunology, with a particular emphasis on its Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) program. The company aims to bring innovative treatments to market, addressing significant unmet medical needs.

Given Enanta's financial standing and strategic objectives, a partnership for its RSV program would likely involve:

- **Upfront Payment**: $50M–$100M, providing immediate capital to support ongoing R&D activities.

- **Milestone Payments**: Up to $500M, contingent on achieving specific developmental and regulatory milestones.

- **Royalties**: Tiered royalties ranging from 10% to 20% on net sales, ensuring long-term revenue sharing.

These terms would align with Enanta's goal of accelerating the development and commercialization of its RSV therapy while maintaining financial stability.


Then, I questioned why it lowered the upfront payment:

Why I Adjusted to $50M–$100M (More Realistic for Enanta)
Stock Price & Market Cap: Trading at $7.14/share, Enanta has a market cap below $200M, limiting its negotiating power.
Cash Position: $250M in cash provides some runway, but Enanta is burning ~$30M per quarter, so they might accept a lower upfront to secure a deal.
Recent Court Loss (vs. Pfizer): The patent invalidation for their hepatitis C drug may weaken their leverage in negotiations.
Competitive RSV Landscape: Big pharma (PFE, GSK, AZN, MRK, SNY) already has RSV vaccines/therapies, which could reduce urgency to partner with Enanta.

Re: RSV deal - ChatGPT - Pretty impressive.

It suggests JNJ the most likely partnership - "Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) stands out as a potential partner. While JNJ has been involved in RSV vaccine development, there is limited information about their current RSV therapeutic pipeline, suggesting they might be interested in collaborating to strengthen their position in RSV treatments."

As to deal terms, it states the below:

If Enanta Pharmaceuticals (ENTA) were to partner with a major pharmaceutical company for its RSV program, the deal terms would likely follow a standard biotech licensing or co-development agreement. Based on industry norms and Enanta’s past deals, here’s what the terms might look like:

---

### **1. Upfront Payment**
- **Range**: $75M–$250M
- The upfront payment would depend on the strength of Enanta’s RSV data (Phase 2 results), the level of interest from multiple bidders, and whether a partner sees it as best-in-class.

---

### **2. Milestone Payments**
- **Regulatory Milestones**: $300M–$600M
- Example:
- $50M for the initiation of a **Phase 3 trial**
- $100M upon successful **completion of Phase 3**
- $150M for **FDA approval**
- Additional payouts for **EMA & other regulatory approvals**

- **Sales Milestones**: $500M–$1B
- Example:
- $100M if **annual sales exceed $500M**
- $250M if **annual sales exceed $1B**
- Additional tiers if sales surpass **$2B+**

---

### **3. Royalties on Net Sales**
- **Tiered Royalties**: 12%–22%
- Example:
- **12% on sales up to $500M**
- **16% on sales between $500M–$1B**
- **20%–22% on sales over $1B**
- This is in line with industry norms for small biotechs licensing out late-stage assets.

---

### **4. Co-Development / Co-Promotion (Optional)**
- If Enanta wants to retain some commercialization rights (e.g., **North America or EU**), they may negotiate **cost-sharing** for Phase 3, with a profit split (e.g., **50/50 or 60/40**).
- More likely, Enanta would **out-license the entire asset** due to its small size and limited commercial infrastructure.

---

### **5. Manufacturing & Supply Agreements**
- Enanta may **retain manufacturing rights** or grant exclusive supply agreements for royalty-bearing sales.

---

### **6. Option to Buyout**
- Some deals include an **M&A trigger**, allowing the partner to acquire Enanta at a premium (e.g., **2–3x the stock price**) if the RSV asset meets key milestones.

---

### **Example of Comparable Deals**
- **Pfizer–ReViral (2022)**: $525M acquisition for RSV assets
- **Merck–Molnupiravir (Ridgeback)**: Upfront + royalties structure
- **Gilead–Galapagos (2019)**: $3.95B upfront for a broad partnership

---

### **Final Valuation Estimate**
- **Total Deal Size**: $1B–$2.5B, assuming strong Phase 2 data
- **Upfront Cash**: $100M–$250M
- **Royalties**: 12%–22%

Would you like me to tailor this further based on Enanta’s financials and strategic goals?

any guesses on what we would consider buy on the news terms?

Well for starters unless the share price reaches a point where it is greater than net cash there won't be a sell on the news event here if they partner on any terms that at least cover residual RSV costs from current trials. This assumes zero value (but not negative value from ongoing cash expenditures) on preclinical assets.
If the deal assumes a partner takes over full development responsibility for milestones and royalties and the company doesn't opt to co-develop/co-promote the calculation IMO is up front dollars + probability weighted estimate for each of the milestones (many of those are often redacted so best guess) + value of the royalty also probability weighted. then the stock should trade at that value + net assets. So if the price falls short of this valuation I would consider it a buy

ENTA’s fully-diluted share count @12/31/24=27.95M—an increase of 0.96M since 9/30/24 due to the end-of-fiscal-year options granted on 11/27/24.

The 27.95M figure consists of: 21.33M basic shares on the 12/31/24 balance sheet (https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0001177648/000095017025018810/enta-20241231.htm p.3); and 6.62M options and unvested restricted-stock shares and equivalents (whether or not exercisable) (ibid, p.9).

NOTE: My method of counting fully-diluted shares is intentionally a maximum-case scenario—i.e. intentionally conservative for calculating enterprise value. My count includes all options, regardless of how far out of the money they may be.

ENTA’s pro forma net cash @12/31/24=$251.8M—excluding balance-sheet “debt” relating to ENTA’s deferred-royalty obligations, which is a GAAP artifact rather than an actual debt instrument.*

The $251.8M figure, which declined $25.0M since 9/30/24, consists of the net current assets on the 12/31/24 balance sheet (https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0001177648/000095017025018810/enta-20241231.htm p.3) after excluding the $32.7M line under Current Liabilities called, “Liability related to the sale of future royalties.” *

NOTE: My calculation of pro forma net cash is intentionally conservative—i.e. I do not count the cash receivable by the company when existing options are exercised.

*The GAAP treatment for ENTA’s deferred-royalty obligations is described in #msg-172603887.

Thanks!

Re: PSU awards Kind of interesting that the performance criteria was met despite the stock performance. The performance criteria for these specific PSUs were solely related to (undisclosed) achievements in R&D.

Not a bad week at all. Happy weekend everyone! The best is yet to come ;)

PSUs were filed by six of the officers.
Kind of interesting that the performance criteria was met despite the stock performance. Overall I consider it generally bullish because they elected to only sell such portion to satisfy the tax liabilities and hold the rest.

Thank you!   A lot of good choices on that list.  Got any  guesses on what we would  consider buy on the news terms?

anyone with an interest in infectious disease (and immunology if it is a sale of the company)
GSK
JNJ
GILD
RHHBY
MRK
AZN
SNY
SHionogi
the list goes on

RSV seasonal patterns in peds and adults updated:

The current RSV season is on the downswing and clearly past peak so a few observations from the RSV-NET site https://www.cdc.gov/rsv/php/surveillance/rsv-net.html

1. Among all age groups last season hospitalization rates peaked at 4.3/100K persons on 12/28/2023. This year the peak was 3.9 per 100K on 1/4/2025. The AUCs (i.e. overall hospitalization burden due to RSV) appear on track to be slightly lower this year than last, but pretty close - just shifted a bit later overall. For comparison in the year prior to the pandemic 2019-2020 the burden was clearly lower looking at the curves (AUC), with a peak on 1/4/2020 of 2.6 per 100k persons.

*so overall RSV burden the last 2 years appears as high or higher than historical standards (the site only has data as far back as the 2018 season but it was a bit lower than 2019 even)

2. Among neonates and infants 0-6 months of age you can clearly see an effect of Mabs and maternal vaccines. The peak this year (which was a worse season than per-covid overall) was lower with peak hospitalization rate of 74.4 per 100k versus lst year's 136.9 per 100K, and 125 per 100K 2019 season

3. In infants 6 months to 1 year this beneficial effect is markedly attenuated - with peaks of 49.6 per 100k this year vs 67 per 100K last year, 50 per 100k 2019

4. in 1-2 year olds, this year was worse than last year with peak hospitalization of 47.7 per 100k versus 42 per 100k , so even though this season a bit milder overall you can start to see the upward shift in age for hospitalization rates due to kids getting first infections at older age. for comparison this figure was a lot lower prepandemic with a peak at 29.6. so while the last 2 seasons were worse than 2019, I don't know if that lone can account for the doubling in hospitalization rates

5. Similar patterns emerge if you look at hospitalization rates in 1-4 year olds

6. The overall peds hospitalization rates 0-4 year olds this year peaked at 29.9 vs 36.7 last year vs 24.9 in 2019, but the overall burden when eyeballing the curves and AUC seems narrower between this year and last, but certainly lower this year, and probably a bit lower year on year than the overall RSV hospitalization burden for all comers.
My take here is that neonates and young infants get hospitalized a bit more commonly than a first infection in a 1-2 year old, so despite the upward shift in age for first severe infection, the overall burden is *slightly lower overall in peds with the introduction of passive immunity for this population. **
Obviously studies that are sure to be forthcoming will shed more light but I figured I would share a quick real time glean on seasonal patterns.

For Adults:

1. >65 year olds had slightly higher peak hospitalization rates last year versus this year at 9.4 vs 8.7. It peaked at 4.2 in 2019-2020. Adult vaccines are simply not making headway into curbing the RSV disease burden which is consisten with the fact that only 10% or so of older adults got vaccinated so far (thank you ACIP and shame on you)

2. This last year RSV vaccines were universally recommended without a shared decision making for 75 yo and up, yet the hospitalization rates this year was a smidge higher than last year even peaking at 14.7 vs 14.5 per 100K persons. Again the effect of vaccines is simply not there

If you are curious what one of the vaccine makers thinks of the risk benefit of the RSV vaccine in older adults, here is a copy of response I recently got from GSK IR:

We believe in the overall clinical profile and benefits of Arexvy. The GBS signal is rare <10 cases per 1 million vaccinated. CDC analysis showed up to 15K hospitalisations and 2K deaths are prevented over 3 seasons per 1 million vaccinations in each of the ACIP recommended populations vs up to 18 cases of GBS per 1 million vaccinations
and yet
We have not assumed any cohort expansion (or revaccination) in our 2025 forecasts

All of this is to once again say the introduction of all the preventative measures for RSV have not had a material effect on either the peds or adult market opportunity for an antiviral IMO

** because in peds dosing is weight based, even with slightly overall lower disease burden in peds the commercial opportunity will not be affected as much as the gap in disease burden because older kid simply require more drug per course of treatment

Possible partners other then PFE?  

Agree, market cap is merely 160mm, the RSV program alone can easily worth 3x of that. Maybe a bit of hype but only a tiny bit. 😉

It seems to me that the up-front payment for the [RSV] partnership is around 1 year of cash flow or around $100 million. You are correct that the one-year extension to the cash-runway guidance equates to roughly $100M of cash burn, but I would not infer that the amount of up-front cash in a prospective RSV partnership is expected to be $100M. The amount of up-front cash depends to a great extent on the other deal terms such as the regulatory milestone payments and the royalty rate on sales.

What I infer from the roughly $100M of reduced cash-burn guidance is that ENTA thought it would have cost about $100M to run the phase-3 trials without a partner.

p.s. Thank you for your kind words.

[hype!]—The share price is up ~60% from_the_January_low, but this is just the tip of the iceberg, IMO. [/hype!]

Watch video

Thank Dew for the documentation of the company guidance. It seems to me that the up front payment for the partnership is around 1 year of cash flow or around $100 million.

That is my two cents.

It’s a good day. Especially for all of us that know the real good news has not even hit yet.

There was a few day delay between my emailing IR and yesterdays response. Usually they get back within a day. I bet the same email sent to multiple investors. Maybe they wanted to wait until Luly bought (kidding but maybe not?!)
I’m pretty sure they essentially went public yesterday that a partnership is built into guidance. It’s akin to answering this on a cc and it’s kosher bc it doesn’t promise anything. If you don’t trust management it’s meaningless. If you are like me and have confidence in management and know they don’t talk crap you take something like this as a real positive. Had I gotten the email a few days ago before a 50 percent 2-3 day move I would have bought some trading shares.
Anyway regardless the reason it’s up a lot today it’s a good day

I don’t think ENTA is going back to $5 any time soon… ENTA should continue to move higher as we approach the Annual Meeting.
//..\\ Best wishes.

I don’t think the ceo buying 45k shares alone would trigger a 30 percent move

dewophile, I never underestimate the power of CEO buys to influence the price of a beaten down biotech. CEO sales can have a similar effect. I think such moves just amplify the recent sentiment one way or another. I do agree that more focus by ENTA on an RSV partnership can have a big effect.

Just need 70% more to reach cash value. 150% to include the royalty value.

Sounds good to me. I am now down "only" 30% on my ENTA investment so the next big surge puts me in the money! It has been quite a while.

They have really shot into the lead wow. The mechanism is tricky though to balance risk benefit - companies are talking about different levels of amylase for different indications, Jasper was talking about drug holidays where you can avoid some AEs while it takes mast cells some time to reconstitute (so still get efficacy while off drug).
It would obviously be nice to be in the lead, but sometimes going second can help you learn from more advanced programs - they can work out the dosing kinks

Building a partnership deal into your guidance is a bit different than talking about it like they did at JPM, or even a month prior on the peds call (wasn't that the one where Jay used the term "in earest"), but I get your point

In related news, BPMC expects to start phase-1b for BLU-808 during 1H25:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/blueprint-medicines-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2024-results-302375527.html

BLU-808 is an oral KIT inhibitor. Patients in the phase-1b will have either CSU or CIU*. BPMC expects to run another phase-1b in allergic rhinitis/allergic conjunctivitis.

*Chronic Inducible Urticaria.

The RSV-partnership hint has been out there since the January JPM webcast, but investors apparently didn’t take it seriously until ENTA updated the cash-runway guidance dramatically (#msg-175800700). Even after the guidance update, there was apparently enough confusion about the matter that it took investors—and shortsellers—a few days to figure it out. I don’t think the ceo buying 45k shares alone would trigger a 30 percent move.Agreed.

It's not possible for a company to acquire majority control on the sly. Any company (including affiliates) that reaches a 10% equity stake has to file SEC Form 4 within two business days.

Haha! In all seriousness, ENTA’s recent spike is based on investors coming to their senses about valuation, which is the polar opposite of the price action that drove meme stocks such as AMC. The only commonality is short covering.

how about if some fund calculated that they can acquire majority of the control without moving the price above cash per share? I often wonder whether price dynamics in depressed market like biotech would allow such an event,

Welcome aboard to a new MEME stock! Move over AMC.

Yeah I have a feeling I’m not the only person they told that updated guidance assumes partnership (ie confident it will get done )
I don’t think the ceo buying 45k shares alone would trigger a 30 percent move

Wow!

Just need 70% more to reach cash value. 150% to include the royalty value.

IBKR shows 6.04x500 bid and 6.40x100 ask

It's entirely possible that they are waiting for the initial bid or proposal to come in, possibly later this month. Insider buying before the bids come in should be fine since they have already publicly disclosed their plans to evaluate deals.

After that, there would be two more rounds before they select the final winner. They need to secure something soon, or I suspect many will vote against them in the annual meeting. On top, they have a competitor that is right behind them, seemingly willing to move as fast as possible.

I hope the exclusion of Phase 3 from their guidance signals their confidence in securing a deal soon.

Very disappointed with insider buy ;) /s

I guess I will have to wait a bit longer for the deal.

From someone w SEC experience:
Can't be a serious discussion w a particular partner on price, ok if just general discussions w different parties, and in between tougher to assess

Thx DD
The other SEC filing out today is the 10K:

https://ir.enanta.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/10-q/0000950170-25-018810

The costs in our immunology programs increased by $2.5 million primarily due to the scale-up and IND-enabling activities related to our KIT program and the initiation of preclinical studies for our STAT6 program.

Other Programs

Other program costs decreased by $2.2 million primarily due to the completion of the discovery and optimization activities related to our STAT6 program.

So while the company talks about scale up and ind enabling activities for kit as a 2025 event, it definitely started in earnest last quarter (no surprise). what is a bit unclear to me is they are most definitely in the discovery and optimization phase for stat6, yet in the 10k they say this is at "completion". I think they mean the costs are shifted from "early discovery" to the new stat 6 line item, but it is also possible they are further along and sandbagging a bit.
The big drop in early discovery program costs which is most of the 2,2M cited suggests to me they are probably winding down very early discovery, and perhaps the 3rd immunology program to be announced later this year may be the last. No complaints here I mean 4.4M in the same quarter last year on other early discovery might not sound like much, but at a 100M MC cutting down on this 18M annual burn is welcome news

Thanks. Some obvious errors in there but the calculation of the NPV of the royalty is nice to see laid out. Also how to view the debt may be helpful to some. The Competitive landscape in RSV is both outdated and inaccurate. Thanks for sharing

While it indicates no partnership or other deal is at the finish line, a great indication. IMO many small insider buys as practiced these days are fluff and even a negative for their transparent effort to signal to shareholders. It's the $10,000 signaling buy from wealthy executives that is a disaster - an empty charade treated as a cost of doing (promotional) business. In contrast, a guy like Luly laying down this cash is significant.

Keep in mind per his ownership what his personal net worth in ENTA was a few years ago vs today. Having seen a pretty reasonable fortune slashed he's putting in real money to own more.

At the risk of taking it a bridge too far, the lack of a conf call combined with the purchase shows that the buy is all about the opportunity at this price rather than a desire to be noticed.