|Bid||324.11 x 900|
|Ask||324.51 x 1200|
|Day's Range||322.83 - 330.59|
|52 Week Range||215.78 - 374.99|
|Beta (5Y Monthly)||1.17|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||10.30|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||N/A (N/A)|
|1y Target Est||N/A|
Warren Buffett took positions in Biogen and Kroger. Investors who want to follow Buffett's picking of these two value stocks can also play these ETFs as well.
(Bloomberg) -- Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. piled funds into biotechnology company Biogen Inc. and supermarket operator Kroger Co. as it trimmed some of its bank wagers in the last few months of 2019.Berkshire’s Kroger investment, which totaled $549 million at the end of the year, was disclosed more than a year after Buffett’s conglomerate sold off its stake in retailing giant Walmart Inc. The company also built a $192 million stake in Biogen while trimming its stakes in Wells Fargo & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Bank of America Corp., according to a regulatory filing Friday.Kroger shares surged in late trading, with the stock up 5.6% to $29.81 at 4:59 p.m. in New York. Buffett’s company is wagering on a business that’s trying to navigate a shifting retail landscape, with challenges from online grocery companies and discounters including Walmart, a company that Berkshire eventually exited in 2018.Biogen stock also climbed, rising 1.6% to $338.40 after Berkshire disclosed its holding. The Omaha, Nebraska-based conglomerate hasn’t historically been a big investor in the biotechnology industry, although the company already owns a stake in pharmaceutical company Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.Both the Biogen and Kroger stakes are small in comparison with some of Berkshire’s biggest bets. The company’s Apple Inc. holding, which was cut 1.5% in the fourth quarter, was valued at $72 billion at the end of the year.Buffett’s company has been trimming its stakes in some major lenders to try to avoid crossing a 10% ownership threshold that often draws regulatory scrutiny. He was closer to that level with Wells Fargo and Bank of America, but holds a stake of only about 3.4% in Goldman Sachs.Here’s some other key takeaways from Berkshire’s 13F:Berkshire disclosed two new exchange-traded fund holdings, in Vanguard S&P 500 ETF and SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust. The bets were small investments, totaling $25 million across both.Buffett’s company ramped up its bet on Occidental Petroleum Corp., bringing that investment to $780 million. Berkshire also owns preferred stock in the oil producer, which Buffett obtained as part of a deal to help Occidental in its pursuit of Anadarko Petroleum Corp.Berkshire also increased its stakes in furnishings retailer RH, Suncor Energy Inc. and General Motors Co.For more on Hedge Funds Fourth-Quarter Investments in 13F Filings, click here for our TOPLive blog.(Updates with more information on bank investments starting in second paragraph, Kroger and Biogen shares starting in third paragraph.)To contact the reporter on this story: Katherine Chiglinsky in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael J. Moore at firstname.lastname@example.org, Daniel Taub, Lananh NguyenFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
We expect Alkermes (ALKS) to provide revenue updates on its proprietary marketed products and pipeline candidates when it releases fourth-quarter earnings on Feb 13.
(Bloomberg) -- Paul Nolte would never dream of plugging a stock like Tesla Inc. into a client portfolio at his advisory firm, Kingsview Wealth Management in Chicago. Too volatile. But a bearish options flier for his own account after the thing more than doubled in two months? Maybe.The 34-year money management veteran had been noticing double-digit price gaps that he considers hallmarks of shorts getting squeezed. When the forced buying was over, he figured, support would vanish and the shares would plunge. So he teed up $10,000 worth of puts and waited. And watched. And waited. And thought about it. In the end, he couldn’t pull the trigger.“I was playing with fire,” Nolte said by phone. “I’m better off going to a casino and putting it on black. $10,000 can go to zero really fast.”All week Tesla’s been doing that, tempting and taunting the pros, lighting up brokerage phone lines and getting blood pumping like no time since 1999. If the poster children for the market’s plodding march since 2009 were Apple Inc. and Netflix Inc., Elon Musk’s bear-burner has become the standard bearer for what some now expect to be its last and looniest leg.With the stock spiking from $650 to $950 on Monday and Tuesday, Chris Brown, a Tesla short, barely slept. Lunch with colleagues was canceled and breakfast didn’t come till 2 p.m. He thought about buying the stock after the shares breached a chart line at the end of last week, and selling it Monday -- but decided against it. “It was discordant with my fundamental belief.”“When something is going on that is this big and this organized, you sit and watch,” Brown, managing member at Aristides Capital in Toledo, Ohio, said by phone, describing his actions on Monday. “I stared at my computer non-stop, all day.”Tuesday was different. Brown bought a call spread and a few bearish options, priced about half as much as ones betting the rally would keep going. That was the day Tesla plunged 14% into the close. The price of the put contract Brown eyed went from $9 to $12 by the time his order was filled, before soaring to $84. “We ended up making money.”Few were closer to the center of the storm than Dan Ives, a managing director at Wedbush, whose once-bullish price targets were overtaken as Tesla vaulted over $700, $800, $900 in two days. At least 100 investors have called him looking for an edge on a stock that at peak frenzy made Bitcoin feel like a toothpaste maker in terms of buying pressure.What was it like? “Newark Airport,” Ives said. “The chaos around the stock this week was like being in Newark Airport on a Friday night.”Almost $170 billion worth of Tesla shares have traded in five days, three times as much as Apple and five times as much as Microsoft Corp. The stock’s 20-day volatility is nearly twice that of the next bounciest name in the Nasdaq 100, Biogen Inc., which soared 26% this week. Three-quarters of a million trades have been executed since Monday, seven times the number in Boeing Co.“We’re talking about one of the more historic moves in a stock that’s happened over the last decade,” Ives said. “It’s caught the Street by surprise, which is very rare in a market where information is well-known within two seconds of coming out. It’s been out of a Stephen King movie.”Brian Frank sees it differently: Tesla as a harbinger of long-overdue doom, the beginning of the end to the buy-everything ethic that has been making his life miserable as a value investor.Bitcoin is the only other asset that has elicited as many calls, Frank said, maybe 5% of his clients have phone about Tesla. Those all stopped when the shares rolled over on Wednesday, giving up 17%.“That it can happen with something as big and as visible as Tesla - it gives me hope that it’s clear there are bubbles out there,” said Frank, president at Frank Capital Partners in Key Biscayne, Florida. “This is an over-$100 billion company that’s clearly in the old Eiffel Tower pattern, exactly like Bitcoin. And many other bubbles look like that, too.”To contact the reporters on this story: Elena Popina in New York at email@example.com;Vildana Hajric in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Jeremy Herron at email@example.comFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office imparts a ruling in favor of Biogen (BIIB) over generic drugmaker Mylan to protect the patent of its best-selling multiple sclerosis drug, Tecfidera.
(Bloomberg) -- Biogen Inc.’s rally of more than 30% Wednesday after it won a key patent dispute has some investors celebrating as they put last year’s concern surrounding a failed Alzheimer’s drug study in the rearview mirror.The stock, which almost reached $375, is now higher than it was before it lost a quarter of its market value in March 2019, when a pair of studies for the Alzheimer’s drug failed. With hopes for that drug revived, and patent concerns laid to rest, Biogen is now the year’s top performing large-cap U.S. health stock after a weak 2019.When Biogen and partner Eisai Co. said their experimental Alzheimer’s therapy was a bust, many on Wall Street threw in the towel on the company and said it needed to be an active dealmaker in order to boost investor sentiment. After the pair of wins for Biogen, the $61 billion company remains on track to meet the goals that management laid out at a meeting in San Francisco last month.The next key catalysts for investors is whether or not U.S. regulators will accept a filing for that Alzheimer’s drug, aducanumab, and if it will get priority review status. The company is on pace to deliver a filing for the drug candidate sometime before the end of March.To contact the reporter on this story: Bailey Lipschultz in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at email@example.com, Scott Schnipper, Steven FrommFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Biogen Inc. investors should strap themselves in for a volatile week ahead of a key patent decision on its blockbuster multiple sclerosis drug.A decision from the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board, expected by February 6, could move shares up or down by 8%, options expiring February 7 show. Implied volatility is elevated near 70%, which compares to a three-month historical average of 46%.Competitor Mylan NV is challenging a patent on the drug, Tecfidera, that could wipe out eight years of exclusivity for Biogen and bring a copycat drug to patients sooner than hoped. SunTrust analyst Robyn Karnauskas said a negative outcome for Biogen could slash the biotech’s discounted cash flow model by $40 per share, though specifics on Mylan’s commercial efforts are key to assessing the damage.The drug brought in $1.16 billion in sales for the final three months of 2019, with full-year revenue from the drug reaching $4.4 billion, roughly 30% of the company’s revenue. While bears have pointed out that a negative decision could impact sales in the near-term, William Blair analysts highlighted in a note to clients that any decision will likely be appealed, delaying a final ruling.Chief Financial Officer Jeff Capello told analysts Jan. 30 that the company would appeal any loss in either the patent office or district court cases, which would take 12 to 18 months. Capello said it is “difficult to predict” whether the generic-drug makers would launch without waiting for the appeals court decision.Decisions around Tecfidera patents “could provide near-term volatility and are extremely difficult to predict,” BMO Capital Markets analyst George Farmer wrote to clients. “Transitioning Tecfidera patients and initiating new patients to Vumerity, a more tolerable fumarate, would lessen the impact of a negative IPR decision, but the launch is too early to gauge demand.”Jefferies’ Michael Yee sees a bit more on the line for the decision, projecting a 10% move to either side for Biogen stock. He pointed out in a January 30 note that bears see Biogen as uninvestable ahead of the decision with bulls saying the ruling will remove an overhang on the stock.Among Biogen’s biggest fans on Wall Street, SVB Leerink, reiterated its outperform rating Monday morning writing that the current “valuation already reflects a worst case scenario for the Tecfidera loss of exclusivity.”The decision will pave the way for investors to bet on whether or not U.S. regulators will approve the company’s controversial Alzheimer’s drug candidate. Matt Phipps, an analyst at William Blair, highlighted that the patent ruling and the next steps for aducanumab are among the primary focuses for investors. Biogen is on pace to deliver a filing for the Alzheimer’s candidate sometime in the next two months.\--With assistance from Gregory Calderone, Susan Decker and Christopher Yasiejko.To contact the reporter on this story: Bailey Lipschultz in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at email@example.com, Steven Fromm, Cristin FlanaganFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Last week, you might have seen that Biogen Inc. (NASDAQ:BIIB) released its yearly result to the market. The early...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- If you’re a prosecutor or a regulator looking to get a little good press, one surefire approach is to sue Martin Shkreli, the infamous “pharma bro.”That’s what New York State Attorney General Letitia James and the Federal Trade Commission did on Monday, and it worked like a charm. Reports popped up in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Toronto Star, CBS News, Daily Beast and many other outlets. James herself took a victory lap on Twitter:Shkreli is a perfect target. Five years ago, he became the symbol for outrageous drug prices after he raised the cost of his company’s one drug, Daraprim, to $750 a pill from $13.50 — and then basically laughed at everyone who complained. His nonstop smirking during a subsequent congressional hearing infuriated lawmakers. In the spring of 2018, he was sentenced to seven years in prison for committing financial fraud. Last year, he was transferred from federal prison in New Jersey after the Journal reported that he was using a contraband mobile phone to run the company from his cell. The charges leveled by the attorney general and the FTC against Shkreli(1)and the company — Vyera Pharmaceuticals LLC, as it’s now called(2)— flow directly from that now-infamous price increase. According to the complaint, they have been using illegal tactics to prevent low-cost generics from entering the market. For instance, Vyera drew up agreements with distributors that prevented them from selling Daraprim, which treats toxoplasmosis, to generic manufacturers. (Generic companies need access to the brand-name drugs to make their copies.) It had “data-blocking” agreements, which made it impossible for generic makers to obtain the information to assess whether enough patients needed the drug to make it worth pursuing. And it cut off competitors’ access to pyrimethamine, the active ingredient in Daraprim. All of these measures helped Daraprim maintain its monopoly — and its high price.All five of the FTC commissioners approved the lawsuit, although the two Democrats had reservations, which I’ll get to in a moment. In the FTC’s press release, Gail Levine, the deputy director of the agency’s bureau of competition, said that “Vyera kept the price of Daraprim astronomically high by illegally boxing out the competition.” In the New York attorney general’s press release, James described Shkreli as despicable and said that one of the goals of the lawsuit was to prevent him from ever working in the pharmaceutical industry again.“We won’t allow ‘Pharma Bros’ to manipulate the market and line their pockets at the expense of vulnerable patients and the health care system,” she added.Except pharma bros aren’t the problem. Shkreli jacked up the price of one drug with a small patient population. Meanwhile, the cost of insulin has tripled in the past decade, and many of the country’s 30 million diabetics are rationing insulin shots because they can’t afford the high price. The country’s three insulin manufacturers, Eli Lilly & Co., Novo Nordisk A/S, and Sanofi, are not pharma bros.Humira, the world’s top-selling drug, costs $60,000 a year. Its manufacturer, AbbVie Inc., has successfully fended off generic competition for years. It’s not a pharma bro either. Neither is Roche Holdings AG, Gilead Science Inc. or Biogen Inc., which all have drugs whose prices have skyrocketed. When I asked Rutgers University law professor Michael Carrier why New York and the FTC weren’t going after these bigger — and, frankly, worthier — targets, he made a plausible case that the Daraprim situation was unique. Carrier co-wrote a paper in 2018 that laid out the way antitrust law could be used against Vyera and Shkreli — a paper that the state and the commission appear to have used as a blueprint.“With Daraprim, you can make a straightforward application of antitrust law,” he told me. “Everything they did had anticompetitive effects, and no pro-competition justification. It was maintaining its monopoly by taking actions that had no other rationale other than keeping competition away.”When I asked him why that was any different from, say, Humira, Carrier responded with one word: patents. AbbVie has protected Humira’s monopoly by surrounding the drug with dozens of add-on patents, a practice called “evergreening.” Although the ordinary person might view those patents as being solely intended to maintain the drug’s monopoly, courts tend to give great weight to patent protection. To make an antitrust case against Humira, the authorities would have to argue that its add-on patents are frivolous, and that’s not a winning argument, even if it’s true.Fair enough. Still, Big Pharma uses other tactics to keep generics off the market. Many companies now file “citizen’s petitions” to the Food and Drug Administration — originally intended to allow citizens to influence health policy — against other companies to keep their drugs off the market. They cut deals with generic companies to delay the introduction of a competitor. They also do some of the same things Vyera does to maintain Daraprim’s monopoly.So, yes, maybe a straightforward antitrust case wouldn’t work against these larger players. But there is something else the FTC could do to take on the big boys — and that’s what the two Democrats on the commission, Rohit Chopra and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, suggested in their concurrent statements.Section 5 of the FTC Act gives the agency the ability to declare unlawful “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.” Like many federal agencies, the FTC has become timid, so its use of this broad mandate has been circumscribed in recent decades. “I believe that some of the conduct alleged in the complaint,” against Shkreli and Vyera, Chopra wrote, “also constitutes a violation of the FTC Act’s prohibition of unfair acts and practices.”“I believe that the FTC and many of the State Attorneys General should pursue this legal claim in cases with the similar facts,” he said, adding, “I continue to be concerned that the FTC does not use its authority to the fullest extent possible to combat marketplace abuses. This is another missed opportunity for the Commission.”He’s right. If the FTC and James were willing to go after Big Pharma’s tactics using Section 5, they might be able to do something big and important to rein in drug prices. But that would be difficult, and they might not win. So instead they went after the easiest target on the planet: a “pharma bro” who’s already in prison.If and when they win the case, there will no doubt be another round of congratulatory press releases. And the price of insulin will keep going up.(1) James and the FTC also charged a third party in addition to Shkreli and Vyera: Kevin Mulleady, the chairman of Phoenixus AG, a Swiss company that controls Vyera.(2) It was called Turing Pharmaceuticals when Shkreli was the CEO.To contact the author of this story: Joe Nocera at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Daniel Niemi at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Ideally, your overall portfolio should beat the market average. But the main game is to find enough winners to more...
Biogen's (BIIB) fourth-quarter MS franchise sales are expected to have been flat. Spinraza U.S. sales are expected to have been supported by continued patient growth.