Intellia Stock vs CRISPR Stock: The Winner Is?

Intellia Therapeutics stock $NTLA and CRISPR Therapeutics stock $CRSP are both some of the first #CRISPR #GeneEditing startups to go public. Today, we want to see how they're stacking up in terms of progress being made for lead candidates, strength of partners, runway, and the like. Our belief is that the lead drug for any company is their best foot forward. If that program starts to stumble, it spells problems for the remainder of the pipeline. Raising capital is becoming more difficult for firms of all types, and for gene-editing companies, that will only happen at favorable terms when good/great news gets released. This usually happens around milestone time, so expect lots of volatility going forward as the market processes the new information. Should the lead candidates for either of these companies stumble, then we’ll need to revisit our thesis. In the meantime, no news is good news, unless there’s no news for a long time, then it’s bad news.
Ideally, we'd like to #invest in just one of these stocks. Will we end up holding both?
RESEARCH PIECES USED IN THIS VIDEO:
1. Intellia Therapeutics Stock vs CRISPR Therapeutics Stock
www.nanalyze.com/2022/06/inte...
2. Beam Therapeutics Stock: A Leader in Gene Editing Tech?
www.nanalyze.com/2022/06/beam...
3. Why We’re Selling Editas Medicine Stock
www.nanalyze.com/2022/06/sell...
4. A Complete List of 27 Gene Editing Stocks
www.nanalyze.com/2022/06/comp...
CHAPTERS:
00:00 Intro
00:41 From 27 gene editing stocks to 5
01:38 Things for investors to consider
02:21 CRISPR and Intellia partners
03:25 CRISPR Therapeutics' lead candidate
06:42 The Intellia lead candidate
11:20 Picking a winning stock
13:04 CRISPR and Intellia: pros, cons, runway
14:57 Conclusion
ABOUT US:
This video is brought to you by Nanalyze, a boutique media and research firm founded by finance professionals with decades of experience. We share insights about #DisruptiveTechnology #investments in a language that is future-proof and easy to understand.
Read all the Nanalyze Premium articles you'd like for free! Sign up for a 30-day trial of our monthly subscription with no strings attached: www.nanalyze.com/become-a-nan...

[@joepiv]

Before you start reading the comments you need to subscribe to our channel using the below link. Violators will be persecuted.👮 kzbin.info Sorry, we don't make the rules.

[@dougtrvl888]

Great 👍 Review ! I also have both Crpr & Intellia. Intellia has a very good further back in trials treatment for Hereditary Angioedema , a rare genetic disease causing frequent life threatening allergic reactions. I see these patients myself in the ER from time to time . It appears they may have the cure for this . I also switched out of Editas & into Beam . I also like Caribou especially under 6 dollars. They are focused on a completely different area , mostly cancer . They have the brains of a Jennifer Doudna student & David Lui . They have no overlap with the others .

[@Nanalyze]

Glad you enjoyed that Doug. We'll have to do a follow up on Caribou and give it the same attention as the others. It's now on our to-do.

[@shannonhutchinson4084]

I invested in both of the stocks at the bottom of your list before seeing this video. I have enjoyed heavy gains and will watch for changes.

[@joepiv]

Nice work Shannon. Stay in it for the long term to let the potential mature - like a fine Barolo - and get used to watching paper losses evaporate because this is a very volatile theme. When they really rocket upwards as a group, it can possibly make sense to try and cover some of your cost basis. This may be one exception to the adage, "it's about time in the market, not timing the market."

[@texan4958]

Thank you, sir! It doesn't matter who wins. It will be good for Gene-editing companies and in the end, EDITAS will be the real winner with its royalty fees.

[@MisterSomm]

They just sold EDITAS HAHAAHAHHA

[@Nanalyze]

@MisterSomm Comments like this add very little value. Here's why we sold Editas. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6jTapWfo92VkJI Maybe you can comment on that and let us know why our points of contention aren't a concern to you.

[@Nanalyze]

@texan Not sure we're following you on the Editas remark. We see Beam Therapeutics licensed some IP from Editas and we've detailed that in our video. It's among a whole slew of IP Beam licensed. Any other names that licensed IP from Editas? It would be useful to support the "Editas has the golden IP ticket" comments we've been seeing floating around.

[@alecpokrandt3322]

@@Nanalyze the broad institute (which edit as licsensed their CRISPR cas9 IP from) has prevailed in the most recent court hearing for CRISPR cas9. The implications are uncertain, and there will certainly be appeals by the CVC. However one could stand to reason edit as will sue NTLA and CRSP if they ever commercialize and profit from a therapy.

[@Nanalyze]

@Alec Pokrandt Thank you for the added color! You say it correctly - the implications are uncertain. Editas does have an exclusive license from Broad, and the last communications of that IP win was Feb 2022 from what we can see. It's that uncertainty that we're not willing to speculate on. This is a fast-moving and risky space which could fall flat on its face. We just don't know.

[@alecpokrandt3322]

On innovation day, crsp proclaimed they had their own proprietary base editors

[@Nanalyze]

Did not know Alec, thank you for that info.

[@rk-mu8yf]

Yes. Sam said that in one of the interviews a few months back.

[@bobbylarson6193]

Great information. What is the reason you are not considering Pacific Bioscience as a leader? Thank you for any incite.

[@Nanalyze]

Great question! For one, we tend to find leaders using 3 metrics: market cap, revenue, and revenue growth. However, with companies in the gene editing space, finding a leader is a bit more difficult. This is because revenues and revenue growth are not always predictable, as research is the main focus of these companies. Going based on market cap alone, PACB is smaller than both NTLA and CRSP. That would be the simplest way of determining a "leader". We also consider PACB to be more of a picks-and-shovels play on gene sequencing, while NTLA/CRSP are pure-play gene editing stocks. So it's a bit of apples to oranges. Again, great question as this is a tough industry to pinpoint a leader without really spending some time digging into each company's technology. Feel free to check out our recent article on PacBio here: www.nanalyze.com/2022/04/pacific-biosciences-stock-falls/ Thanks! -Wyatt C.

[@bobbylarson6193]

@@Nanalyze very much appreciate your detailed and timely response.

[@johns.777]

Feels like a VHS VS. Betamax flashback.

[@Nanalyze]

Except in this case there could be multiple winners.

[@johns.777]

@@Nanalyze - 👍🏼🎯

[@lopat4826]

Would be easy just but an ETF.

[@Nanalyze]

True enough, but ETFs usually need to have around 20-30 constituents, and it's tougher than it sounds to launch one and attract enough AUM to survive.

[@BaileyHorse]

Technology is exciting no doubt but applying your logic of determining the value aren’t these companies are all overvalued? No real approved drug no sales. Especially intellia with its P/S over 100?

[@joepiv]

You are very astute. Yes, we did make a big exception to our methodology to invest in the potential of gene editing. The three gene editing stocks we're invested in make up 5% of our tech portfolio right now. Since they all have sporadic revenues (if any) our simple valuation ratio doesn't work here. Same holds true for AI discovery companies.

[@karenmelissamusic]

Most of these technology just sell dreams

[@simonposener7601]

I thought only Beam could use Base Editing.. but NTLA can also?

[@Nanalyze]

This starts to get into the topic of intellectual property which is always tough to navigate. We would assume BEAM has their IP all wrapped up.

[@conqueringruler4283]

With adequate disgust for my own remark: healing people will always be less monetarily profitable as providing continuous treatment.

[@joepiv]

Excellent point.

[@SavvyMoneyShow]

Crsp innovation day

[@Nanalyze]

Yes?

[@SavvyMoneyShow]

@@Nanalyze you asked if it was crisper the innovation day I was saying yes it was crisper

[@Nanalyze]

Oh gotcha man! Yes, lots of mixed feelings on CRISPR's presentation.

[@mikedaniels3009]

Re 4:36: "We don't even know what that means..." Google it and be wise. What research work is that supposed to be? In your position you're supposed to be savvier than that. A biotech investor ought to know the first thing about medicine, be it self-taught. If y'all worked for me, I'd fire y'all on the spot for gross incompetence. Phileas Fogg fired his butler for a lesser offence.

[@joepiv]

Damn it Mike, I'm an MBA, not a doctor ;) Good point. If it takes 10 seconds to Google something, do it and add more value. And you're only allowed to start firing people if you're paying us money. If you are, I'll look forward to the severance package ;)

[@mikedaniels3009]

@@joepiv MBA, the worse for that, "damn it". Know your business, know your product. You don't do such presentations where U out yourself as a medical nitwit, an ignoramus not even knowing the first thing about the shape of sick(le) shaped erythrocytes and WHY they are bad for you. It is my understanding, that IF U invest AND do presentations about a (totally overhyped and overpriced stock) eg this company that claims to have a cure for this horrible sickle cell disease, then you are supposed to KNOW everything about said disease. Just my unhumble opinion. Redeem and amend Yr ways. Best wishes. 🙏🙏🙏

[@Nanalyze]

Okay Mr. Daniels. I had my nice guy hat on for that first response, but your follow up means my "tell it how it is hat" just got put on. It's called snark. You didn't get that, fair enough. Does the shape of a sickle cell influence - in any way at all - the investment thesis we're discussing? No, it doesn't. We happen to believe that being a subject matter expert actually works against you. That's when you'll start buying the story behind the tech more than evaluating the investment in an industry-agnostic manner. Understanding what a company does at a very topical level is literally the entire premise of our entire business. So when we say "that bad TTR protein thingy" we're taking the piss. It's part of the snark. Does knowing exactly how the protein folds incorrectly necessary as an investor? No, it's not. So if you want to discuss technical details, head over to CRISPR Talk channel. Tommy does a great job spelling out the technical details. We're not changing who we are because you don't like it. That said, we always welcome feedback so thank you for articulating your thoughts.

[@mikedaniels3009]

@@NanalyzeI'm happy, for I made you think, hopefully amend Yr ways and thus conveyed lasting added value to U. Now the world is a better place for that.