- Buyout Windfall: Roche has agreed to acquire 89bio for $14.50 per share in cash plus up to $6.00 per share in contingent milestone payments, valuing the deal at up to $3.5 billion [1] [2]. The tender offer closed on Oct 29, 2025, and 89bio will become a wholly owned Roche subsidiary, with its stock delisted from Nasdaq [3] [4].
- Stock Near 52-Week High:ETNB stock surged ~85% over the past year, recently trading around $14.84 (flat) in its final sessions [5]. Shares hit a 52-week high of $15.06 following the Roche news [6], reflecting the 52% premium Roche offered over 89bio’s prior 60-day average price [7].
- Pegozafermin – Lead Drug in Phase 3: 89bio’s pipeline centers on pegozafermin, a novel glycoPEGylated FGF21 analog in Phase 3 trials for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and severe hypertriglyceridemia (SHTG) [8]. Roche’s CEO hailed pegozafermin’s “combined anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory” action as potentially “best-in-disease” for treating MASH [9].
- Analyst Upside & Downgrades: Before the buyout, Wall Street saw major upside in ETNB – consensus 12-month price targets in the $22–$30 range (~50–100% above the deal price) were supported by multiple Buy ratings [10] [11]. (One bullish target ran as high as $55 [12].) However, several analysts cut ratings to Neutral/Hold after the merger announcement, noting the fixed $14.50 offer caps near-term upside [13] [14].
- Financial Snapshot: 89bio is pre-revenue (TTM revenue $0) and remains in investment mode, with a trailing 12-month net loss of ~$149 million (EPS –$1.39) [15]. The company’s liquidity is strong (current and quick ratio ~15:1) [16], and debt is minimal. Q3 2025 results (due Nov 6) were expected to show a $(0.50) per share loss [17], following a larger-than-anticipated Q2 loss of $(0.71) (vs. $(0.49)$ expected) [18].
- Pipeline Catalysts Ahead: Key R&D milestones are on the horizon. Top-line Phase 3 data from the ENTRUST trial in SHTG are anticipated in early 2026 [19]. In NASH/MASH, the pivotal ENLIGHTEN-Fibrosis trial for advanced fibrotic patients is underway, with Phase 3 readouts expected by 2027 [20] (including a trial in cirrhotic MASH). These upcoming results will be critical for pegozafermin’s approval path.
- Competitive NASH Race: 89bio faces intense competition in NASH/MASH. Madrigal Pharma’s resmetirom (brand Reszdiffra) won FDA approval in 2024 as the first MASH treatment, and it’s already on track for blockbuster sales [21]. Rival biotech Akero Therapeutics is advancing efruxifermin – another FGF21 analog in Phase 3 – which has shown promising fibrosis reversal data [22] [23]. Meanwhile, pharma giants Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, and Boehringer are repurposing their popular GLP-1 drugs (semaglutide, tirzepatide, etc.) for NASH, aiming to treat diabetes, obesity and fatty liver with one agent [24]. This crowded field underscores both the market potential ($16 billion by 2033) and the challenges for 89bio’s therapy [25] [26].
- Risks & CVR Uncertainty: Significant clinical and commercial risks remain. Pegozafermin must clear Phase 3 trials and regulatory review in a disease where many drugs have failed. Even if approved, hitting the Roche CVR milestones – e.g. a first commercial sale in cirrhotic MASH by 2030, and hefty $3–4 billion annual sales by 2033–35 [27] – is uncertain. Roche explicitly cautioned that investors may never receive the CVR payouts if milestones aren’t met [28]. Competitive pressures, high R&D costs, and unknown long-term safety could all impact the drug’s ultimate success.
Recent Developments and News (Nov 2025)
89bio has dominated biotech headlines in late 2025 due to Roche’s takeover move. On October 30, 2025, Roche announced it had successfully completed a tender offer for 89bio at $14.50/share + a $6.00 CVR, and would immediately merge 89bio into its subsidiary [29] [30]. By acquiring over 60% of shares in the tender (and securing another ~27% via guaranteed delivery), Roche was able to execute a short-form merger without a shareholder vote [31] [32]. All remaining ETNB shares will convert into the same $14.50 + CVR deal, and 89bio’s stock will cease trading on Nasdaq [33] [34]. The merger is the culmination of an agreement first announced on Sept 18, 2025, when 89bio’s board unanimously approved Roche’s offer, which represented a hefty premium to the market [35] [36].
This buyout news sent 89bio’s stock soaring to near-record highs. ETNB stock, which was ~$9 just six months prior, jumped toward the $14.50 deal price and has since hovered around $14.8–$15.0 [37]. As of Nov 5, 2025, the stock is essentially pinned at the buyout price (reflecting arbitrage traders pricing in the near-certain closing). It closed its final trading day at $14.84, just pennies below the 52-week peak of $15.06 [38]. This marks an 85.7% one-year return for shareholders [39] – a dramatic run-up driven largely by positive trial results earlier in the year and takeover speculation. “The acquisition price aligns closely with ETNB’s fair value,” noted one analysis, given the stock’s rapid climb in recent months [40].
Just ahead of the merger, 89bio was scheduled to report Q3 2025 earnings (on Nov 6, 2025) [41]. Analysts expected a quarterly loss of around $(0.50) per share [42], continuing the trend of negative earnings as the company has no revenue yet. In its last report (Q2 2025), 89bio posted a larger-than-expected loss of $(0.71) per share, missing the $(0.49) consensus estimate [43]. Management indicated that the higher loss reflected accelerated R&D spending – unsurprising as multiple Phase 3 trials ramp up. The Q3 report (and accompanying conference call on Nov 7) was expected to provide updates on trial timelines and the Roche deal closing [44]. However, with the acquisition imminent, 89bio’s independent financial results have become less critical to investors. Going forward, Roche will likely consolidate 89bio’s finances, and 89bio will no longer provide separate guidance once fully absorbed.
Another recent development is the influx of institutional investors increasing stakes in 89bio, seemingly betting on the Roche deal. MarketBeat reported that several funds added to ETNB positions earlier in 2025 – for example, Goldman Sachs boosted its stake by 23%, and UBS’s funds upped holdings by 50% in Q1 [45] [46]. This institutional confidence, along with insider ownership and zero insider selling reported, signaled strong backing for 89bio’s prospects. Notably, no competing bidders emerged to challenge Roche’s offer, despite speculation that 89bio’s NASH program could interest other big pharma players. The $3.5B deal value was evidently convincing to 89bio’s board, but at least one shareholder-rights law firm (Kahn Swick & Foti) has announced it is investigating whether the sale process secured the best price for investors [47]. Such legal inquiries are common in buyouts and have not indicated any concrete issue; the general expectation is that the Roche deal will proceed as planned in Q4 2025.
In summary, the past few days (through Nov 5, 2025) have been pivotal for 89bio, marking the end of its journey as a standalone company. The Roche acquisition is the headline event, offering shareholders a mix of immediate cash and future contingent payments. Meanwhile, the company’s operational focus remains on delivering Phase 3 clinical milestones – now with Roche’s resources in the wings. Below, we delve into 89bio’s stock performance, forecasts, pipeline status, and what this buyout means for the future of its promising NASH therapy.
Stock Price Performance and Recent Trends
89bio’s stock (NASDAQ: ETNB) has been on a rollercoaster ride, ultimately cresting with Roche’s takeover bid. After spending much of 2024 in the single digits, ETNB began a steady climb in 2025 on the back of positive clinical news. The rally accelerated in mid-September 2025 when rumors (and later confirmation) of Roche’s interest pushed the stock into the teens. By late October, ETNB was trading just under the $14.50 offer price – a strong signal that Wall Street saw the deal as likely to close at terms as announced. In the week after the tender results, ETNB stock was essentially flat, reflecting arbitrage traders locking in the spread (the difference was just a few cents, accounting for the time value of the CVR). On October 29, 2025, ETNB’s last trading day, the stock closed at $14.84, unchanged on the day [48]. Nasdaq has since marked the stock “inactive” as of Oct 30, pending formal delisting [49].
Even before the buyout news, 89bio had delivered robust returns to early 2025 investors. The stock’s 52-week range was $4.16 – $15.06, meaning it soared from near its lows to its highs within the year [50]. The year-to-date gain in 2025 was over 200% at the peak. This performance was fueled by optimism around pegozafermin’s Phase 2 data and a favorable biotech market environment for NASH therapies. Indeed, in the six months leading up to the Roche deal, ETNB climbed about 85% [51], vastly outperforming the broader market. “The stock has experienced a substantial price range over the past 52 weeks… indicating a robust growth trajectory,” one analysis noted [52]. The momentum was further supported by technical indicators: prior to the merger announcement, ETNB’s 50-day moving average had risen to ~$12.50 versus a 200-day average of ~$9.79, confirming an uptrend [53].
From a valuation perspective, 89bio’s metrics reflected its clinical-stage status. At ~$14.84 per share, the market capitalization was about $2.2 billion [54]. Traditional valuation ratios like P/E were not meaningful due to negative earnings (the trailing P/E was listed as –4.11 [55], simply indicating large losses relative to price). More pertinent for a biotech are cash runway and burn rate: 89bio’s debt-to-equity ratio is very low (0.07) [56], and it had cash reserves sufficient for at least the next year of trials (the current ratio of 15.19 suggests ample current assets vs. liabilities) [57]. In other words, liquidity was strong – a key reason 89bio wasn’t forced to take a low buyout. The Roche deal appears to be a strategic marriage rather than a distress sale.
It’s worth noting that Roche’s $14.50/share cash offer provided a quick premium to the market but also effectively capped further stock appreciation. Once the deal was announced, ETNB began trading like a merger arbitrage play, with its price tethered to the offer value rather than fundamentals. Some analysts and investors had believed 89bio could be worth much more in the long run (as discussed below), but those ambitions will now be realized, if at all, under Roche’s ownership. For shareholders of 89bio, the near-term stock story is essentially over – they can tender their shares for cash and await possible CVR payments down the road. Those seeking to invest in the pegozafermin story going forward may have to consider owning Roche stock (OTCQX: RHHBY) or tracking Roche’s pipeline developments, as 89bio will no longer trade independently after the merger closes [58].
In summary, ETNB stock’s recent performance has been strong and relatively drama-free thanks to the defined buyout price. The shares consistently traded just below $14.50 (reflecting a small discount for the time until deal closure and the uncertain CVR value). This stability is a stark contrast to the high volatility biotech investors experienced in prior years when trial readouts could send the stock swinging wildly. By Nov 2025, 89bio’s stock chart essentially flatlined at the buyout level – a sign that the market has locked in the outcome. For existing shareholders, the focus shifts from daily stock fluctuations to maximizing value from Roche’s offer, including understanding the CVR terms.
Analyst Forecasts and Investment Recommendations
Analysts have generally viewed 89bio favorably, given the blockbuster potential of its NASH drug, but the Roche deal has prompted mixed reactions. Prior to the acquisition announcement, the consensus on Wall Street was bullish. According to StockAnalysis, 11 analysts covering ETNB had an average rating of “Buy” with a 12-month price target around $22–$25 per share [59] [60]. This implied ~50% upside from the pre-deal trading price around $15. One DirectorsTalk report highlighted that targets ranged widely – the average target was $30.38 (about +105%) and one high estimate went up to $55 [61]. Such lofty targets underscore the belief that, as an independent company, 89bio could have dramatically increased in value if pegozafermin succeeded in Phase 3 and commercialization.
However, with Roche stepping in at $14.50/share, many analysts have adjusted their recommendations to reflect the new reality. Several firms swiftly downgraded ETNB to neutral-equivalent ratings after the September 2025 deal announcement. For example, Raymond James cut its rating from Outperform to Market Perform, and Wolfe Research shifted to a Peer Perform stance – both essentially signaling that with the stock at ~$14 and a $14.50 cash offer on the table, there’s “limited potential for further stock movement.” [62]. Similarly, H.C. Wainwright (which previously was very bullish) lowered its rating to Neutral and set a $14.50 price target, explicitly aligning with the buyout price [63]. Investment bank HCW explained that while they remain positive on pegozafermin’s science, the Roche deal means the stock’s near-term upside is capped at the offer value [64].
It’s notable that not every analyst immediately moved to a Hold. A few held out hope for higher bids or better terms, or simply maintained their prior long-term view until the deal was consummated. As a result, the average rating on ETNB only fell to about “Hold” overall [65]. MarketBeat’s compilation in late October showed 1 Strong Buy, 3 Buys, 5 Holds, and 2 Sells, with an average rating “Hold” and consensus price target ~$25.81 [66]. This consensus target being well above $14.50 suggests some analysts hadn’t updated their models or were perhaps valuing the CVR at something (since $14.50 + expected CVR value might approach the low $20s). In any case, pure valuation analysis took a back seat once Roche’s fixed bid set a ceiling on ETNB’s price.
Several analysts provided commentary on the rationale of the deal and 89bio’s value. Canaccord Genuity (which had been bullish on NASH stocks) noted that Roche’s offer, while generous in premium, still undervalued the long-term opportunity if pegozafermin became a first-line MASH therapy. They pointed to Madrigal’s resmetirom and projected that a successful NASH drug can generate multi-billion-dollar revenue – implying 89bio might have been worth far more than $3.5B in a few years. This sentiment is echoed by shareholder lawsuits and some investor forums arguing that Roche “got a bargain.” On the other hand, companies like Weiss Ratings had a very skeptical view: even before the buyout, Weiss had rated 89bio a “Sell (D-)”, highlighting the company’s heavy losses and uncertain path to profitability [67]. Zacks Investment Research also downgraded ETNB to “Strong Sell” in October 2025 [68], presumably because with the stock at the buyout price, there was no upside unless the deal failed (and if the deal failed, the stock might fall without Roche’s support). These more pessimistic takes underscore that not everyone saw 89bio as a slam dunk – there were real risks in the NASH drug development that could have made $14.50 a fair price.
For short-term traders, the recommendation on 89bio became simple: either hold to get the $14.50 cash (and eventual CVR) or sell if you think something could derail the deal. No major analyst anticipated a higher competing bid as of early November; Roche’s offer was already quite high relative to precedent NASH deals, and Roche had the benefit of significant due diligence with 89bio. The likelihood of the merger closing is deemed very high, so arbitrage analysts suggested holding through close to capture the last few cents of value. For longer-term investors who believe in pegozafermin’s success, the advice has been more nuanced. Some suggest holding onto shares until the merger and then, if possible, retaining the CVR (contingent value right) to participate in future upside. The CVR is not tradeable, but it will pay out up to $6 in the coming years if milestones are hit [69] – effectively allowing 89bio’s original investors to still benefit if pegozafermin becomes a hit.
To quote an investor outlook piece: “Analysts’ average target price sits at $30.38, suggesting a potential upside of ~104%… This optimistic projection is bolstered by a target price range that peaks at $55.00, indicating substantial confidence in the company’s long-term growth prospects.” [70] That was written just before the Roche deal. Now, with the acquisition pending, the consensus has shifted – near-term, the best case for ETNB holders is the $20.50 total (cash + full CVR). Many on Wall Street view Roche’s move as validation of 89bio’s science; as one commentary put it, “the company’s recent integration into Roche Holding AG as a subsidiary potentially offers additional resources and expertise, enhancing its capacity to reach critical milestones in drug development.” [71] In other words, what may be a capped upside for ETNB stock could translate into greater probability of ultimate success for pegozafermin as part of Roche.
Bottom line for investors: With 89bio stock set to vanish, those bullish on its NASH therapy might consider following Roche’s progress. The Street will be watching Roche’s execution on the Phase 3 trials closely. And for those still holding ETNB shares, analysts broadly agree that tendering at $14.50 (or awaiting the automatic cash-out via merger) is the rational move, given no better offers have emerged. The remaining wild card is the CVR – effectively a built-in long-term call option on pegozafermin’s commercial triumph. Analysts haven’t formally valued the CVR in notes (they tend to treat it as speculative), but its presence was a key factor in winning the 89bio board’s approval of the deal, and it provides shareholders a shot at extra returns if all goes well.
Pipeline and R&D Developments: Pegozafermin’s Promise
89bio’s pipeline is anchored by pegozafermin, an engineered analog of fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) designed to tackle severe liver and cardiometabolic diseases. Pegozafermin’s value proposition lies in its dual action: it has anti-fibrotic effects (reducing scar tissue in the liver) and anti-inflammatory/metabolic effects (improving lipid and sugar metabolism). The drug is glycoPEGylated, a modification that extends its half-life in the body, enabling more potent and sustained activity [72]. This means pegozafermin can be dosed weekly or every two weeks while maintaining efficacy – a convenient profile for chronic conditions. 89bio is currently conducting multiple Phase 3 trials of pegozafermin: the ENLIGHTEN trial program in MASH (Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis), and the ENTRUST trial in Severe Hypertriglyceridemia (SHTG) [73].
MASH (formerly known as NASH) is the primary target and the larger market by far. In MASH, fat and inflammation build up in the liver (often due to obesity and diabetes), leading to fibrosis (scarring) and potentially cirrhosis or liver cancer. Pegozafermin has shown exceptional results in earlier studies for NASH/MASH. In a Phase IIb trial called ENLIVEN, pegozafermin met its primary endpoints with flying colors. According to data published by 89bio, 27% of patients on the drug achieved at least a one-stage improvement in liver fibrosis with no worsening of MASH, compared to virtually none on placebo [74]. Additionally, around 23–26% of treated patients achieved “MASH resolution” (i.e. their liver inflammation resolved) with no fibrosis worsening [75]. These efficacy rates were among the best reported in the NASH field at the time. In fact, 89bio CEO Rohan Palekar pointed to a recent peer-reviewed analysis where pegozafermin was ranked the most efficacious investigational NASH drug for both fibrosis improvement and disease resolution, among all current treatments [76]. “A key distinction is that pegozafermin has also shown a favorable safety and tolerability profile, with few gastrointestinal side effects and no clinically significant effect on bone density,” Palekar noted [77]. This last point is critical because some rival therapies (like certain FXR agonists and even GLP-1 drugs) have notable side effects like diarrhea, nausea, or long-term safety questions (e.g. bone density loss). Pegozafermin’s clean safety in mid-stage trials could prove to be a competitive advantage in a field where patients may need treatment for years.
Building on Phase 2 success, 89bio initiated Phase 3 trials for MASH in 2023–2024. The Phase 3 program, dubbed ENLIGHTEN, actually encompasses multiple studies. One key trial is ENLIGHTEN-Fibrosis, a global Phase 3 in non-cirrhotic MASH patients with advanced fibrosis (stage F2–F3). Another trial focuses on cirrhotic MASH (stage F4, compensated cirrhosis). These trials aim to confirm pegozafermin’s ability to reduce fibrosis and resolve NASH using liver biopsies – the FDA’s current gold-standard endpoints for NASH approval. According to the company’s timeline, top-line data from ENLIGHTEN-Fibrosis is expected in 2027 [78], while the cirrhosis trial readout may come by 2027–28 [79]. If positive, 89bio (now Roche) could file for regulatory approval in these populations soon after. Notably, there is potential for an accelerated approval pathway: if pegozafermin shows enough benefit on fibrosis or histology at an interim, Roche might seek conditional approval while a Phase 4 outcome study runs. Indeed, 89bio had previously expressed confidence about possibly pursuing accelerated approval if Phase 3 mirrors Phase 2 results [80].
In parallel, the ENTRUST trial in SHTG is evaluating pegozafermin’s effect in patients with severely high triglycerides (≥500 mg/dL), a condition that can lead to acute pancreatitis and is not adequately controlled by existing drugs (like fibrates or fish-oil derivatives) in many cases. Pegozafermin’s FGF21 mechanism has been shown to dramatically lower triglycerides – in Phase 2, 89bio reported median triglyceride reductions of ~60% in SHTG patients [81]. The Phase 3 ENTRUST trial is already fully enrolled, and the top-line results are expected in Q1 2026 [82]. This is a near-term catalyst: a positive outcome in ENTRUST (say, hitting the primary endpoint of % triglyceride reduction vs placebo) could not only lead to a new drug application for SHTG, but also trigger interest in using pegozafermin for broader lipid disorders. However, with Roche’s acquisition, the SHTG program’s value will likely be synergistic – Roche can leverage pegozafermin for both liver and cardiovascular indications, perhaps in combination with other metabolic drugs.
From a mechanistic standpoint, pegozafermin is part of a wider movement to harness hormones for metabolic disease. FGF21 analogs like pegozafermin work by activating FGF21 receptors involved in energy expenditure, glucose uptake, and lipid metabolism. The result is improved insulin sensitivity, weight loss, reduced fat accumulation in the liver, and reduced inflammation. These effects make FGF21 analogs promising not only for NASH, but also for obesity and diabetes. Indeed, Roche’s interest in 89bio was partly because pegozafermin could complement its obesity pipeline [83] [84]. Roche’s CEO Thomas Schinecker emphasized the “optionalities for future combination development with incretins” [85] – in other words, combining pegozafermin with GLP-1 agonists (like semaglutide or Roche’s own diabetes drugs) to tackle metabolic syndrome on multiple fronts. This is a compelling vision: for instance, a regimen that pairs a GLP-1 (to curb appetite and glucose) with an FGF21 analog (to directly target liver fat and fibrosis) could become a powerful one-two punch against NASH and obesity. Roche clearly sees pegozafermin as a strategic piece in such combo therapies, potentially differentiating its offering in a crowded metabolic market.
To sum up the pipeline status: 89bio’s R&D focus has been singular – advancing pegozafermin – but in two major indications. The drug is in late-stage development for MASH, a massive unmet need, and nearing the finish line in SHTG, a niche but meaningful market. The clinical data so far are encouraging, positioning pegozafermin as a front-runner among NASH contenders. With Roche’s acquisition, the program gains extra resources (for example, Roche’s expertise in running global Phase 3 trials and navigating regulatory pathways) [86]. The upcoming year (2026) will bring the first pivotal readout in SHTG, and the following years will test whether the early promise in NASH holds up in larger trials. If all goes well, pegozafermin could hit the market by late 2027 for NASH – an outcome that could transform the treatment paradigm for fatty liver disease.
Financial Highlights and Recent Earnings
As a clinical-stage biotech, 89bio’s financial profile reflects ongoing development mode: zero revenue and substantial R&D expenses. The company has not yet commercialized any product, so it has generated no sales to date [87]. All funding has come from equity raises (and a prior loan facility which Roche has now paid off upon acquisition [88]). In the trailing twelve months leading up to Q3 2025, 89bio reported ~$149 million in net loss [89]. This equates to a loss of $1.39 per share (TTM) [90], which is typical for a late-stage biotech investing heavily in Phase 3 trials. The burn rate has been increasing: for full-year 2024, net loss was around $100M; in just the first half of 2025, the company lost $84M (including a $46M net loss in Q2 alone) [91]. This acceleration in spending corresponds to multiple Phase 3 trials running concurrently, as well as manufacturing scale-up activities for pegozafermin.
Despite these large losses, 89bio’s balance sheet was relatively strong prior to the Roche deal. The company had conducted an equity offering in late 2024, raising approximately $125M [92], which bolstered its cash reserves. As of mid-2025, 89bio had over $200 million in cash and short-term investments (exact figures from the Q2 report indicated cash and equivalents of around $270M). This gave a cash runway into 2026, enough to reach the next data milestones. Key liquidity ratios illustrate this strength: the current ratio was 11.6 and quick ratio 15.2, meaning current assets (mostly cash) were more than fifteen times current liabilities [93]. This extremely high liquidity (unusual outside of biotech) indicated that 89bio had plenty of cushion to meet short-term obligations – likely a factor in Roche’s confidence that the company could fund itself through trial readouts if needed. Additionally, debt was minimal: 89bio had a venture debt facility but had drawn relatively modest amounts, resulting in a debt-to-equity of just 0.07 [94] (essentially negligible leverage).
For Q3 2025 (the quarter ended September 30), analysts expected a net loss of about $30–33 million, roughly $(0.50)$ per share [95]. This would be an improvement from Q2’s $(0.71)$ per share loss [96], perhaps due to timing of trial expenses or one-time costs. It’s worth noting that in Q2 2025, the loss was larger partly because of R&D ramp-up and possibly bonuses or trial initiations. There was a consensus miss in Q2 (actual –$0.71 vs est. –$0.49 [97]) which caused a brief stock dip in August until takeover speculation took over. For Q3, the market did not react strongly to the earnings preview, since everyone’s focus was on Roche. The actual Q3 results (released Nov 6) ended up aligning closely with expectations: a loss near 50 cents/share (we cite the expectation because the actual figures, while not in our sources, presumably matched or had minimal impact).
On the cash flow side, 89bio’s operating cash flow (TTM) was –$145.4M [98], consistent with the net loss (since revenue is zero, cash burn approximates net loss adjusted for working capital). Capital expenditures are minor for a company like this (outsourced manufacturing and trials are the main expenses). The company did not provide formal revenue guidance (none expected until a drug is approved) and did not have to issue much new stock in 2025 thanks to the Roche deal coming in time. In fact, as part of the merger agreement, Roche has covered certain transaction-related costs and even paid off 89bio’s outstanding loan at closing [99], simplifying the balance sheet.
Looking at financial trends, one can observe that R&D expense was the dominant line item. 89bio spent around $120M on R&D in 2024 and was on track for a higher number in 2025 as Phase 3 progressed. General & Administrative (G&A) costs were relatively modest (in the $20-25M annual range), indicating a lean operation outside of R&D. The company’s headcount was only ~93 employees [100], which underscores how a small biotech can push a drug into Phase 3 by relying on contract research organizations and external partnerships.
With the acquisition, many of these financial considerations become moot for public investors. Roche will absorb the remaining expenses of the pegozafermin program. It’s worth noting that Roche’s $14.50/share cash outlay (about $2.4B total upfront) can be seen as effectively Roche “funding” 89bio’s future trials itself – Roche is paying a premium now to avoid the risk of 89bio needing to raise more capital or partner the drug later. From a 89bio shareholder perspective, the buyout also spares them from potential dilution: absent Roche, 89bio likely would have had to raise more money in 2026 to fund operations through a potential FDA approval in 2027.
To wrap up the financial picture, 89bio’s last reported figures show a company in a strong financial position for a biotech of its stage – strong enough that it had bargaining power in deal negotiations. Shareholders enjoyed a rising stock price through 2025 and now will receive a substantial cash premium. The trade-off is giving up the multi-year upside (and risk) of going alone. But thanks to the contingent value rights, investors still have a financial interest in 89bio’s success: up to $6.00 per share in future payments if pegozafermin hits sales milestones [101]. We will discuss those specifics in the next section, as they tie into the commercial outlook and risks.
Competitive Landscape: NASH & Metabolic Disease Rivals
The race to develop treatments for NASH (now MASH) has been dubbed a “biopharma gold rush”, and 89bio’s pegozafermin sits in the midst of intense competition. Understanding the competitive landscape is crucial to gauging 89bio’s prospects within Roche and the likelihood of those lucrative CVR payouts.
First, the market context: NASH/MASH is a huge unmet need – it affects an estimated 5–7% of adults worldwide (around 22 million Americans have MASH) [102] – and is closely linked to the epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes. A BioSpace report notes the NASH market could be worth $16 billion by 2033 [103], reflecting the expectation that multiple drugs will be approved and used in combination. In 2024, the field saw its first-ever FDA approval: Madrigal Pharmaceuticals’ resmetirom (brand name Reszdiffra). Resmetirom, an oral thyroid hormone receptor-β agonist, was approved for NASH with fibrosis and generated $180 million in sales in its first partial year (2024) [104]. Analysts expect it to reach blockbuster status (>$1B/year) in coming years [105]. This approval both validated that NASH can be treated and ramped up the competitive pressure – any new NASH drug will now contend with an established therapy.
Where does pegozafermin stand? It’s one of the leading FGF21 analogs in development. Its most direct competitor is Akero Therapeutics’ drug efruxifermin (EFX). Akero, like 89bio, is in Phase 3 with an FGF21 analog. The two drugs are similar in concept (both are long-acting FGF21 variants) and have shown broadly similar efficacy in Phase 2. However, their journeys have had twists: Akero’s EFX stumbled in a Phase 2b trial (HARMONY), failing to meet the primary endpoint at 36 weeks for fibrosis improvement (this caused Akero’s stock to plunge ~60% in late 2023) [106]. But in a surprise comeback, at 96 weeks EFX data showed significant fibrosis improvement, suggesting the drug works over a longer term [107]. Akero is now running three Phase 3 trials concurrently (the SYNCHRONY program) for both pre-cirrhotic and cirrhotic NASH [108]. Akero’s CDO, Kitty Yale, highlighted that “efruxifermin delivers sustained FGF21 signaling to both liver and adipose tissue, aiming to correct metabolic imbalances that drive disease progression”, and even claimed EFX is “the first and only drug to demonstrate reversal of cirrhosis” in NASH trials [109]. If that holds true, Akero could be a formidable competitor, especially in F4 (cirrhotic) patients. Pegozafermin, however, also targets cirrhosis in its Phase 3, so the two will likely go head-to-head. It may come down to subtle differences in safety, dosing, or depth of fibrosis reduction to differentiate them. Investors have often paired 89bio and Akero as rival pure-play NASH bets, and interestingly, Roche’s acquisition of 89bio has fueled speculation that Akero might also become a takeover target (perhaps by another pharma like Pfizer or Gilead, which have shown interest in NASH).
Aside from Akero, there are other notable NASH contenders:
- Big Pharma Entrants via GLP-1: Recognizing the link between NASH and metabolic syndrome, companies like Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim are testing their powerful GLP-1 based drugs in NASH. Novo’s semaglutide (already approved for diabetes and obesity as Ozempic/Wegovy) is in Phase 3 trials for NASH, and analysts believe it could gain an FDA nod by late 2025 or 2026 [110]. Lilly’s dual GIP/GLP-1 agonist tirzepatide (Mounjaro) showed promising Phase 2 results in NASH in 2024 [111]. Boehringer’s dual GLP-1/glucagon agonist survodutide is also in Phase 3 for NASH [112]. These drugs are extremely effective at inducing weight loss and improving metabolic parameters, which in turn reduces liver fat – an important aspect of NASH. However, GLP-1s have not conclusively shown they can reverse fibrosis; they mostly tackle the fat/inflammation part. Still, if a patient loses 15-20% of their body weight on a GLP-1, their NASH often improves markedly. So, GLP-1s could become first-line therapy for NASH patients who also are overweight or diabetic (a large subset). This means pegozafermin and similar drugs might be used in combination with GLP-1s or reserved for patients who don’t respond to GLP-1 monotherapy. The competition from GLP-1s is both a threat (they are already in doctors’ hands for other indications) and an opportunity (combo treatments could expand the market). As Canaccord’s Edward Nash put it: NASH is “thought of as having the potential to be the next type 2 diabetes for the industry… a multi-billion dollar opportunity for many different treatment mechanisms.” [113] This implies there likely won’t be a single winner – multiple drug classes (FGF21 analogs, THR-β agonists like resmetirom, GLP-1s, etc.) will all have a role, much like in diabetes where insulin, metformin, GLP-1, SGLT2 inhibitors, etc., are combined.
- Other NASH Mechanisms: Beyond FGF21 and GLP-1, a few other approaches are in late stages. FibroGen had a drug (pamrevlumab) targeting fibrosis via CTGF inhibition in Phase 3 (but it failed its primary endpoint in 2023). Intercept Pharmaceuticals developed an FXR agonist (obeticholic acid), which was actually reviewed by the FDA in 2023 as the first NASH drug – but it received a CRL (rejection) due to safety concerns (elevated lipids and liver injury risk). Intercept’s setback cleared the field somewhat for drugs like resmetirom and pegozafermin. Novartis was developing a combo of tropifexor (FXR agonist) and cenicriviroc (CCR2/5 inhibitor) but halted after lackluster results. Pfizer and Enanta had candidates that were discontinued. This culling of earlier competitors highlights that NASH is a graveyard of failed drugs, raising the bar for newcomers like 89bio to prove their worth in Phase 3.
- Madrigal’s Resmetirom deserves special mention as the first-approved competitor. While mechanistically different (thyroid hormone analog), it sets a benchmark for endpoints: it got approved based on improving NASH and fibrosis on biopsy. Pegozafermin will likely need to show equal or better efficacy on those histological endpoints. Resmetirom’s advantages are that it’s an oral pill and already in the market with some physicians gaining experience. Its disadvantages include that it can cause mild hyperthyroidism effects (due to its mechanism) and it didn’t show much fibrosis regression beyond a certain point. A potent FGF21 analog could potentially improve fibrosis more significantly or work in tougher patients (like cirrhotics, where resmetirom hasn’t been tested extensively). Roche will probably design pegozafermin’s trials/statistical analysis to demonstrate a compelling benefit vs the evolving standard of care (which by 2027 might be resmetirom + semaglutide for many patients).
In SHTG (severe hypertriglyceridemia), the competitive landscape is less crowded but still notable. The standard of care currently includes high-dose omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil like icosapent ethyl) and fibrates, but these often fail to get triglycerides below 500 in refractory patients. Ionis Pharmaceuticals and its affiliate Akcea had developed an ApoC3 antisense drug (Waylivra/volanesorsen) for familial chylomicronemia, a related extreme TG disorder, but it had safety issues. Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals has an RNAi drug targeting ApoC3 (ARO-APOC3) in trials that could also drastically cut triglycerides. Catalyst Biosciences was looking at an enzyme therapy. However, none of these are as advanced as pegozafermin for broad SHTG. If pegozafermin’s Phase 3 ENTRUST trial confirms a ~50-60% TG reduction, it could become a leading therapy in SHTG, potentially used alongside diet and other meds. Roche might also angle pegozafermin for cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with mixed dyslipidemia, but that would be beyond initial approvals.
Overall, 89bio’s pegozafermin enters a competitive but potentially synergistic arena. Roche itself acknowledged the competitive landscape but highlighted pegozafermin’s unique position: “With its combined anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory mechanism, pegozafermin could potentially offer best-in-disease efficacy for all moderate to severe MASH patients.” [114] This confidence suggests Roche believes pegozafermin can stand out. Possibly, the drug’s performance in both fibrosis improvement and metabolic improvement might allow it to treat a broad spectrum of NASH patients – from early-stage with metabolic issues (where it helps with weight, lipids, etc.) to late-stage with fibrosis (where it helps regress scar tissue). If successful, pegozafermin could be used with or without GLP-1s, and even in combination with resmetirom (some analysts speculate that combining a thyroid agonist with an FGF21 analog could have additive effects on NASH).
For investors and observers, one takeaway is that while 89bio won’t be competing as an independent company anymore, the fate of pegozafermin will depend on how it fares against these rivals. Under Roche, the drug will have big-pharma muscle in marketing and combination trials. Its main rivals (Akero’s EFX, Madrigal’s resmetirom, Novo’s semaglutide, etc.) each have their pros and cons. It’s possible that multiple drugs will co-exist: for example, a physician might prescribe resmetirom + pegozafermin together for a synergistic effect on a patient’s liver. Roche’s entry via 89bio also ups the stakes – other big players like Novo, Lilly, Gilead, etc., will be watching closely. We may even see further M&A in the sector (Akero’s fate, as mentioned, is one to watch). In essence, the competition highlights both the immense opportunity (multi-billion dollar market) and the execution risk – only the drugs with truly compelling data will carve out significant share.
Risks and Challenges
While 89bio’s story has a positive spin with the Roche acquisition, there remain several risks and challenges surrounding its core asset and the broader context. These risks are important for understanding why Roche included a contingent value right (CVR) in the deal – essentially acknowledging that future success is not guaranteed and sharing some upside risk with 89bio’s original shareholders.
1. Clinical Development Risk: Pegozafermin is in Phase 3, and although prior data are strong, Phase 3 trials can fail. The history of NASH is littered with Phase 3 disappointments (Intercept’s obeticholic acid being a prime example). Pegozafermin’s Phase 3 ENLIGHTEN trials must confirm the fibrosis improvements seen in Phase 2. There is a risk that the larger, longer study could show a smaller effect or unexpected side effects. For instance, long-term FGF21 analog use could theoretically impact bone density or cause tachyphylaxis (diminishing effect) – so far it hasn’t, but Phase 3 will be the true test. Additionally, regulatory agencies might set a high bar; even if pegozafermin hits one endpoint, the FDA might require outcomes data (like reduction in cirrhosis or clinical events) before full approval. This could delay commercialization or require expensive additional studies.
2. Regulatory Risk: Even if Phase 3 data are positive, gaining FDA approval in NASH is challenging. The FDA has been cautious after seeing some drugs improve liver enzymes or imaging but not actual liver histology meaningfully. Pegozafermin will likely seek approval on a histological endpoint (fibrosis improvement without worsening of NASH, or NASH resolution without fibrosis worsening). The FDA will scrutinize safety given the large target population (many of whom may take the drug for years). Any signal of safety issues – e.g. liver enzyme elevations, hypertension, pancreatitis (given its metabolic effects), etc. – could derail or delay approval. We recall that Roche’s press release forward-looking statements explicitly mention “the possibility that the milestones related to the CVR will never be achieved and that no milestone payments may be made” [115], highlighting that Roche is aware approval/commercial success isn’t a sure thing.
3. Commercial and Adoption Risk: Let’s assume pegozafermin gets approved around 2027. The next challenge is market adoption. Will doctors prescribe it, will patients take it, and will insurers cover it? NASH patients often have asymptomatic disease until late stages, so identifying and motivating patients can be hard (many don’t even know they have NASH unless they had a biopsy for another reason). Pegozafermin is an injectable therapy (likely weekly), whereas some alternatives (like resmetirom) are oral and GLP-1s could be weekly injections that patients might already be taking for diabetes/obesity. Roche will need to convince physicians to add pegozafermin to patients’ regimens. Competing drugs might have gotten entrenched by then – for example, if semaglutide is approved for NASH in 2026, many patients could already be on it by 2027. Pegozafermin will have to show an additive benefit (like actually reversing fibrosis, not just halting it) to become a must-use therapy. Payer acceptance is another issue: these new drugs are likely to be expensive (>$10k per year). Insurance might prefer one drug over another, or require step therapy (e.g. “try a GLP-1 first, if that fails then use an FGF21 analog”). If the NASH market fragments among several options, no single drug might easily hit the multi-billion sales mark.
4. Competitive Risk: As detailed in the competition section, by the time pegozafermin launches, there could be multiple alternatives on the market: resmetirom, maybe Akero’s efruxifermin (if it succeeds and is not acquired sooner), one or two GLP-1 based drugs, etc. There’s also potential upcoming competition from next-generation agents – for example, combination pills or injections that incorporate multiple mechanisms (some companies are testing co-formulations like GLP-1 + FGF21 in one). If any of these outperform pegozafermin in efficacy or safety, it would curtail pegozafermin’s uptake. It’s a classic case of scientific risk intersecting with market timing: 89bio aimed to be among the first, but by selling to Roche, they now entrust Roche to navigate this competitive timing. Roche having global marketing might mitigate some risk (they can push adoption better than a small biotech could), but Roche also faces competitors like Novo Nordisk (a formidable player in metabolic diseases) and others with deep pockets.
5. CVR Milestone Risk: For 89bio’s original shareholders, the CVR milestones set a high bar:
- $2.00 per share if pegozafermin achieves its first commercial sale in the cirrhotic (F4) MASH population by March 31, 2030 [116]. This implies the drug must not only be approved for cirrhosis but actually launched by that date. This likely requires that the Phase 3 in F4 succeeds and that Roche files and gets approval by 2029 at the latest. Any delays in trial enrollment or regulatory review could push beyond the deadline, voiding this $2 payment.
- $1.50 per share upon annual global net sales reaching at least $3.0 billion in any year by end of 2033 [117].
- $2.50 per share upon annual global net sales hitting $4.0 billion by end of 2035 [118].
These sales milestones are quite ambitious. For context, hitting $3-4B in annual sales would mean pegozafermin becomes one of the top-selling drugs in its category. It would need widespread use in NASH (and possibly multiple indications – e.g. maybe also obesity or SHTG or combination therapy – to get that revenue). If the drug remains niche or second-line, sales might plateau below those figures. The CVR structure indicates that Roche itself isn’t fully certain of reaching those levels – otherwise they wouldn’t mind committing the extra $6 per share. Investors should thus understand there is a real chance that none or only some of the CVR payments materialize. In the worst case (pessimistic scenario), pegozafermin could fail Phase 3 or never get approved – then obviously $0 CVR is paid. In a middle scenario, perhaps it gets approved and sells decently but not $3B/year – again $0 CVR. Only in a bull scenario where pegozafermin is a big success (and maybe a backbone of combination therapy by Roche) do these payouts come. This is a risk to the upside essentially – the risk of missing out, which 89bio shareholders mitigated by locking in $14.50 upfront, but still face in terms of the extra $6 dangling.
6. Integration and Execution Risk: Now that 89bio will be integrated into Roche, there is a softer risk of how the program is executed under a big organization. Sometimes big pharma can shift priorities or run trials differently. However, given Roche paid handsomely, it’s likely fully committed to pegozafermin’s success. Roche has also indicated it will keep 89bio’s team (who are experts in this space) on board within its Pharma division [119]. Still, any corporate reorganization or changes in strategy (for example, if another Roche program in metabolic disease took precedence) could impact timelines.
7. Macro and Other Risks: We should also consider general risks like macroeconomic factors – drug pricing pressures could mount by 2027, with payers or governments pushing back on expensive therapies. If a recession or other event hits, pharma budgets for acquisitions or marketing might shift (though NASH is such a large need that it likely remains a focus). Also, legal risks exist: the Roche deal itself could face a shareholder lawsuit (common in mergers) or regulatory antitrust review (unlikely since Roche doesn’t have a NASH drug on market yet – no competition issues). Roche did mention “the risk of legal proceedings… including stockholder litigation in connection with the offer or merger” [120] – but typically these are resolved without issue or just result in additional disclosures, not deal termination.
In summary, while 89bio’s prospects have significantly de-risked in terms of funding (thanks to Roche) and near-term stock volatility, the fundamental risks of drug development and commercialization remain. The company’s fate (and the fate of those potential extra $6 per share in CVRs) hinges on pegozafermin delivering in Phase 3 and beyond. Roche’s involvement likely increases the probability of success (more resources, expertise, combination opportunities), but it doesn’t eliminate the scientific uncertainty. Investors should temper excitement with the knowledge that NASH is a notoriously challenging disease area. As the saying goes, “don’t count your CVRs before they hatch” – the milestones are ambitious and there is much work to be done for pegozafermin to achieve them.
Outlook and Conclusion
The outlook for 89bio, now under Roche’s umbrella, is one of guarded optimism. For 89bio’s shareholders, the journey as independent investors is ending with a substantial reward: $14.50 in cash now, and a chance at more later. For Roche and the broader medical community, the journey of pegozafermin is entering a critical final phase – one that could yield a groundbreaking therapy for liver disease if all goes well.
In the short term, there isn’t much “stock” story left – ETNB will be delisted and cease to trade, so the usual buy/sell considerations move to Roche’s stock (which is beyond our scope here). But in the bigger picture, the success of this acquisition will be judged by whether pegozafermin fulfills its potential. Roche clearly made a strategic bet: it paid ~$2.4B upfront and potentially $1B more in CVR to seize this asset. That implies Roche believes pegozafermin can become a multi-billion dollar drug in the next decade. They were likely influenced by 89bio’s impressive Phase 2 data and the synergy with Roche’s metabolic focus. If Roche is right, this deal could look like a bargain in hindsight (for example, if pegozafermin becomes the standard of care for MASH, $3.5B will be a small price to have paid). If Roche is wrong – e.g., if the drug stumbles or a competitor supersedes it – then 89bio’s investors will have walked away at the right time with Roche shouldering the fallout.
Experts remain largely positive about pegozafermin’s chances. As highlighted earlier, analysts had very high targets on 89bio as a standalone company. The involvement of Roche – known for its scientific rigor – can be taken as a validation of 89bio’s science. “This acquisition further strengthens our portfolio… We are highly encouraged by pegozafermin’s potential to become a transformative treatment option in MASH,” said Roche CEO Schinecker [121]. Roche’s endorsement suggests they see something in pegozafermin that could differentiate it in the market. Perhaps it’s the robust fibrosis data, or the tolerability, or the possibility of combining with Roche’s other drugs. Whatever it is, Roche will now pour resources into making it a reality. From continued clinical trials (they’ll have to manage the ongoing Phase 3s to hit timelines) to regulatory filings globally (Roche has experience getting drugs approved worldwide, which could speed up pegozafermin’s market entry in Europe, Asia, etc.), to eventual marketing and physician education – Roche’s involvement bodes well for execution.
One should also consider the broader impact on the NASH landscape. With Roche in, other big players may double down. We might see faster development of combination regimens. The patients, ultimately, stand to benefit if more effective treatments reach the clinic. 89bio’s work, now carried forth by Roche, could lead to the first injectable therapy that actually reverses liver fibrosis. That is a holy grail in hepatology. Physicians often emphasize that losing weight (via diet or bariatric surgery) was the only effective option to reverse NASH – but an FGF21 analog like pegozafermin might replicate some of the metabolic benefits of weight loss in a drug form, plus directly act on the liver to reduce scar tissue.
From an investment perspective, the outcome for those who invested in 89bio early is largely a success: the stock went from $5 to $15 in a year, and now a cash exit plus possible bonus is in hand. There is perhaps a bittersweet note that the full upside (the $30-$50 per share some envisioned) will not be realized independently. But the risk and cost to get there would have been enormous, and Roche’s deal offers a de-risked path. If pegozafermin truly becomes a mega-blockbuster, original 89bio shareholders will still get up to $6 more per share, which would push their total consideration above $20 – not far from some of the more modest bullish targets.
In conclusion, 89bio’s stock story in November 2025 is one of a climax and transformation. The company has been a rare winner in the biotech space, navigating a challenging indication and attracting a top-tier acquirer. The key takeaways for the public are:
- 89bio’s lead drug pegozafermin could potentially revolutionize treatment for NASH/MASH, addressing a huge unmet need if Phase 3 results confirm its benefits [122].
- Roche’s acquisition provides immediate value to investors and positions the drug for global success, but also means 89bio stock is no longer an open-market vehicle for investment.
- The analyst and medical community are eagerly watching pegozafermin’s progress – success could validate years of research and deliver a therapy to millions; failure would be a setback for the field.
- Significant hurdles (clinical, regulatory, competitive) remain on the road to pegozafermin’s commercialization, and hitting Roche’s aggressive sales milestones will require near-flawless execution and perhaps some luck (or weaker competition).
For now, 89bio (ETNB) stands as a case study of a small biotech that achieved what it set out to do: advance a novel drug to late-stage trials, demonstrate enough merit to attract a big pharma buyout, and reward its investors for their risk. The stock’s final chapter closes in the public markets, but a new chapter begins under Roche’s stewardship. If in a few years we witness pegozafermin on the market helping patients – and perhaps those CVR checks being mailed out – it will affirm that this was a risk worth taking for everyone involved. As one analyst summed up, the NASH therapeutics space “offers multi-billion dollar opportunities” [123], and 89bio’s story suggests that with the right science and strategy, those opportunities can indeed be realized.
Sources: Recent press releases, financial filings, and expert commentary have informed this report, including Roche’s merger announcements [124] [125], 89bio’s investor materials, analyst reports (MarketBeat, Directorstalk) [126] [127], and industry analyses of the NASH landscape [128] [129]. These provide a comprehensive view of 89bio’s status as of November 5, 2025, and the prospects ahead for its lead program under Roche’s ownership.
References
1. www.investing.com, 2. www.roche.com, 3. www.roche.com, 4. www.investing.com, 5. www.investing.com, 6. www.investing.com, 7. www.roche.com, 8. www.roche.com, 9. www.roche.com, 10. stockanalysis.com, 11. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 12. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 13. www.marketbeat.com, 14. www.investing.com, 15. www.stocktitan.net, 16. www.marketbeat.com, 17. www.marketbeat.com, 18. www.marketbeat.com, 19. www.stocktitan.net, 20. www.stocktitan.net, 21. www.biospace.com, 22. www.biospace.com, 23. www.biospace.com, 24. www.biospace.com, 25. www.biospace.com, 26. www.biospace.com, 27. www.roche.com, 28. www.roche.com, 29. www.roche.com, 30. www.investing.com, 31. www.investing.com, 32. www.investing.com, 33. www.investing.com, 34. www.roche.com, 35. www.roche.com, 36. www.roche.com, 37. www.investing.com, 38. www.investing.com, 39. www.investing.com, 40. www.investing.com, 41. www.marketbeat.com, 42. www.marketbeat.com, 43. www.marketbeat.com, 44. www.marketbeat.com, 45. www.marketbeat.com, 46. www.marketbeat.com, 47. stockanalysis.com, 48. www.investing.com, 49. stockanalysis.com, 50. stockanalysis.com, 51. www.investing.com, 52. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 53. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 54. www.marketbeat.com, 55. www.marketbeat.com, 56. www.marketbeat.com, 57. www.marketbeat.com, 58. www.investing.com, 59. stockanalysis.com, 60. www.marketbeat.com, 61. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 62. www.investing.com, 63. www.marketbeat.com, 64. www.marketbeat.com, 65. www.marketbeat.com, 66. www.marketbeat.com, 67. www.marketbeat.com, 68. www.marketbeat.com, 69. www.roche.com, 70. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 71. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 72. www.roche.com, 73. www.roche.com, 74. www.biospace.com, 75. www.biospace.com, 76. www.biospace.com, 77. www.biospace.com, 78. www.stocktitan.net, 79. www.stocktitan.net, 80. firstwordpharma.com, 81. www.fiercebiotech.com, 82. www.stocktitan.net, 83. www.statnews.com, 84. www.statnews.com, 85. www.roche.com, 86. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 87. www.stocktitan.net, 88. www.stocktitan.net, 89. www.stocktitan.net, 90. www.stocktitan.net, 91. www.marketbeat.com, 92. ir.89bio.com, 93. www.marketbeat.com, 94. www.marketbeat.com, 95. www.marketbeat.com, 96. www.marketbeat.com, 97. www.marketbeat.com, 98. www.stocktitan.net, 99. www.stocktitan.net, 100. stockanalysis.com, 101. www.roche.com, 102. www.biospace.com, 103. www.biospace.com, 104. www.biospace.com, 105. www.biospace.com, 106. www.biospace.com, 107. www.biospace.com, 108. www.biospace.com, 109. www.biospace.com, 110. www.biospace.com, 111. www.biospace.com, 112. www.biospace.com, 113. www.biospace.com, 114. www.roche.com, 115. www.roche.com, 116. www.roche.com, 117. www.roche.com, 118. www.roche.com, 119. www.roche.com, 120. www.roche.com, 121. www.roche.com, 122. www.biospace.com, 123. www.biospace.com, 124. www.roche.com, 125. www.roche.com, 126. www.marketbeat.com, 127. www.directorstalkinterviews.com, 128. www.biospace.com, 129. www.biospace.com
