Neuren Media and Analyst Coverage, page-747

Yeah, I agree. Would love to see how they reason out these valuations. They must have 5% against Ph 3 success or some other massive discount in their model somewhere.

I can understand perhaps why many would discount the success of any new drug in the neurodevelopment space by a huge amount considering the historical failure rate. As Hottod pointed out there have been many many failures.

If in the entire history of the field there has only ever been one drug approved for NDD, then you'd want to be very conservative evaluating a new one.

But when this new drug is directly related to that only successful drug, then logic would suggest the opposite - that it would have a far higher than average likelihood of success.

None of this seemingly common sense logic appears to get reflected in any of the analysts valuations I've seen.

I keep coming back to price target = current price +-10% as the only formula that seems to fit analysts valuations in any consistent manner.