Terns Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: TERN) is still living inside one of the more dramatic biotech story arcs of 2025: eye-popping clinical data, followed immediately by a massive equity raise, followed by a flurry of analyst price-target resets.
As of Tuesday, December 16, 2025, TERN shares were trading around $44.
That price level matters because it sits right on top of the two big forces investors have been digesting all month:
- The “best-in-disease” narrative around Terns’ investigational CML drug TERN-701, and
- The balance-sheet rewrite from a $747.5 million gross public offering that also brought dilution.
Below is a complete, publication-ready roundup of the current news, forecasts, and market analysis shaping Terns Pharmaceuticals stock as of 16.12.2025, plus the catalysts that could drive the next move.
Why Terns Pharmaceuticals stock has been so volatile in December 2025
If you’re trying to understand TERN stock right now, the cleanest explanation is: new oncology credibility arrived all at once—and the market repriced the company in real time.
The catalyst: Phase 1 CARDINAL data for TERN-701 in CML
On December 8, 2025, Terns disclosed updated and expanded results from its ongoing Phase 1 CARDINAL trial of TERN-701, an investigational allosteric BCR::ABL1 inhibitor for previously treated chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). The disclosure was tied to presentations at the 67th American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting and Exposition. [1]
In the company’s SEC filing, Terns reported (data cutoff September 13, 2025) that across dose cohorts:
- 63 patients were enrolled as of the cutoff
- 38 patients were efficacy-evaluable
- Cumulative major molecular response (MMR) rate by 24 weeks was 74% (28/38)
- Among those counted in that 74%: 64% achieved MMR, and 100% of those already in MMR maintained it at cutoff
- Deep molecular response (DMR) achievement by 24 weeks was 29% (10/34)
- No patients had lost MMR at the time of cutoff [2]
Those are unusually strong early-stage numbers in a competitive area, which is why the stock reaction wasn’t subtle.
The market reaction: a step-change in price and attention
Price action during the week of the ASH update shows how fast sentiment shifted. For example, TERN’s closing prices moved sharply higher after the data release and financing announcements (illustrative closes):
- Dec 5 close: ~$29.36
- Dec 8 close: ~$40.23
- Dec 9 close: ~$42.57
- Dec 10 close: ~$44.61
- Dec 11 close: ~$47.09
- Dec 15 close: ~$44.01 [3]
This is classic biotech behavior: when the “does it work?” question flips from “maybe” to “this looks real,” valuation models and expectations get rewritten quickly.
The financing headline investors can’t ignore: $747.5 million raised (and diluted)
Strong clinical headlines often get followed by fundraising. Terns followed that playbook—just at an unusually large scale.
Pricing: upsized $650 million deal at $40 per share
Terns announced the pricing of an upsized underwritten public offering of 16,250,000 shares at $40.00 per share, for expected gross proceeds of $650 million, excluding the underwriters’ option. [4]
Closing: underwriters fully exercised option; total gross $747.5 million
The deal then closed with 18,687,500 shares sold (including the full option exercise) at the same $40.00 offering price, for gross proceeds of $747.5 million. [5]
What that means for TERN stock today
This raise is a double-edged sword:
- Bull case: the company just bought itself real runway to push TERN-701 forward aggressively (and fund launch prep work if it eventually gets that far). [6]
- Bear case: adding ~18.7 million shares is meaningful dilution, and the market now has a very obvious “anchor” price around $40, which traders often treat as a reference point for support/resistance. [7]
In other words: Terns fortified the balance sheet—but shareholders paid for it in ownership percentage.
What analysts are forecasting now: price targets jumped into the mid-$50s to $70 range
The most actionable “forecast” coverage in mid-December is coming from the wave of analyst notes that followed the ASH dataset and the financing.
Here’s what changed—and what it implies.
Major firms raised targets after the ASH update
In the days after the CARDINAL update, multiple research shops raised price targets, often while reiterating bullish ratings:
- Jefferies: raised price target to $70 from $35 (maintained Buy) [8]
- Oppenheimer: raised to $58 from $28 (maintained Outperform) [9]
- H.C. Wainwright: raised to $60 from $20 (maintained Buy) [10]
- Truist: raised to $56 from $35 (kept Buy) [11]
- Barclays: raised to $56 from $36 (kept Overweight) [12]
- BMO Capital: raised to $54 from $35 (kept Outperform) [13]
- Mizuho: raised to $54 from $33 (kept Outperform) [14]
- Citizens: raised to $57 from $35 (kept Market Outperform) [15]
A key theme across these notes: analysts are increasingly modeling TERN-701 not just as a salvage therapy for heavily pretreated patients, but as a candidate that could push earlier into the treatment sequence—if durability holds up and later trials confirm results.
Why “consensus targets” may look inconsistent right now
One weird-but-true market detail on December 16: different data vendors show different “consensus” numbers, largely because targets are being updated faster than some aggregators refresh.
For example:
- StockAnalysis shows a smaller analyst set with an average target around the high-$40s and a median in the mid-$50s, with a high around $60. [16]
- Meanwhile, some Nasdaq-hosted analyst-consensus pages cite an older snapshot (e.g., “as of Dec 6, 2025”) with a much lower average target that may not yet reflect the mid-December upgrades. [17]
Bottom line: the direction of revisions is clearly up, but the “one number” consensus depends on where you look and how quickly that source updates.
The clinical story investors are buying: TERN-701’s “best-in-disease” argument
TERN-701 is attracting attention because it’s competing in a known mechanism class—but trying to do it better.
Mechanism and positioning
TERN-701 is described as a highly selective, allosteric BCR-ABL inhibitor—the same broad target universe as Novartis’ Scemblix (asciminib), which is already approved. [18]
Analysts and industry coverage have focused on three investor-relevant angles:
- Efficacy (MMR rates that look unusually high for early CML datasets)
- Tolerability (low rates of severe adverse events so far, no dose-limiting toxicities reported in the dose-escalation portion) [19]
- Convenience (company/analyst commentary noting daily dosing and no apparent food effect in the data summaries) [20]
Additional color from oncology-focused reporting
OncLive’s coverage of the ASH presentation highlighted deeper detail at higher doses, including:
- At ≥320 mg once daily (a recommended dose range discussed in the coverage), an overall 24-week MMR rate reported as 80% in a subset with sufficient follow-up, and deep molecular response reported at 36% in an efficacy-evaluable group. [21]
Meanwhile, conference-analysis coverage from OncologyPipeline (ApexOnco) argued that Terns’ dataset looked strong relative to competitor programs in cross-trial comparisons—while also noting the usual caveats about comparability across studies. [22]
And Barron’s coverage framed the move as one of the standout “small biotech lifted by ASH data” stories, pointing to dramatic cancer-cell reductions and drawing investor attention to the possibility of larger pharma interest—though that remains speculation until any deal materializes. [23]
Valuation check: momentum is real, but the stock is priced like success is coming
As of December 16, the market is not valuing Terns like a sleepy R&D shop. It’s valuing it like a company with a potential breakout asset—and it shows in basic valuation comparisons used for early-stage biotechs.
Simply Wall St’s December 16 write-up notes a price-to-book multiple far above broader pharma industry comps, explicitly flagging the premium valuation and the risk that setbacks could compress it. [24]
That doesn’t mean the stock is “wrong.” It means the stock is fragile to disappointment—because expectations are now high.
What to watch next: the 2026 questions that will decide whether TERN stock can hold (or grow)
For Terns Pharmaceuticals stock, the next phase is less about headlines and more about durability, reproducibility, and execution.
Here are the key questions that matter most:
1) Does response durability hold up with longer follow-up?
Early MMR and DMR rates can look amazing in small cohorts. The bigger value inflection comes when:
- the same effect persists over time, and
- safety remains clean as exposure increases. [25]
2) Can Terns translate Phase 1 momentum into a credible registrational path?
Company and analyst commentary has pointed toward planning for later-stage trials (including the possibility of frontline/earlier-line studies). What investors will look for next is crisp clarity on:
- trial design,
- endpoints,
- timelines, and
- regulatory alignment. [26]
3) How does the competitive landscape evolve?
Novartis’ Scemblix is the obvious reference point, but it’s not the only competitor. CML is a space where:
- incremental efficacy and tolerability differences matter,
- sequencing (what patients get first, second, third) can define market share, and
- cross-trial comparisons can mislead if populations differ. [27]
4) What does Terns do with the rest of its pipeline?
Multiple sources note Terns’ shift in focus toward oncology and away from a prior metabolic emphasis. The strategic question is whether non-core assets get partnered, paused, or advanced—and how that affects burn rate and investor narrative. [28]
The near-term setup for TERN stock on December 16, 2025
By mid-December, Terns Pharmaceuticals stock has settled into a new regime:
- The clinical thesis got stronger (or at least, the dataset was strong enough to convince many analysts to re-rate the company). [29]
- The company’s cash position likely improved dramatically after closing a $747.5M gross raise—reducing “will they need money?” risk, while increasing dilution reality. [30]
- Analyst targets moved sharply higher, with many fresh targets clustering in the mid-$50s to $70 range. [31]
- Valuation is now premium, which raises the stakes for every future dataset. [32]
At around $44 today, the market is essentially saying: “We believe the drug is real—but we’re still waiting to see if it stays real.”
References
1. www.sec.gov, 2. www.sec.gov, 3. stockanalysis.com, 4. www.globenewswire.com, 5. www.globenewswire.com, 6. www.nasdaq.com, 7. www.globenewswire.com, 8. www.investing.com, 9. www.investing.com, 10. www.investing.com, 11. www.tipranks.com, 12. www.tipranks.com, 13. www.tipranks.com, 14. www.investing.com, 15. www.investing.com, 16. stockanalysis.com, 17. www.nasdaq.com, 18. www.globenewswire.com, 19. www.sec.gov, 20. www.onclive.com, 21. www.onclive.com, 22. www.oncologypipeline.com, 23. www.barrons.com, 24. simplywall.st, 25. www.onclive.com, 26. www.biospace.com, 27. www.oncologypipeline.com, 28. www.biospace.com, 29. www.sec.gov, 30. www.globenewswire.com, 31. www.investing.com, 32. simplywall.st
