Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
AGING Analysis Report
Aug 15, 2026
8 days ago · 100% complete
NOT DEPENDABLE This report predates a filing — its financial basis has been replaced.
Report generated: Aug 15, 2026 · Filing on record since: Aug 22, 2026 · 7 days after
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Adma Biologics Inc. (ADMA) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Low · Gem Score -29 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 16 · Value -66 · Sentiment 34 (timing only, not weighted)

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Adma Biologics Inc.

ADMA NASDAQ
Healthcare · Biotechnology
Ramsey, NJ 07446, United States admabiologics.com Updated Aug 15, 11:09am
Price
$9.47
Market Cap
$2.1B
Employees
640
Beta
0.77
Avg Volume
2,608,827
CEO
Mr. Adam S. Grossman

Adma Biologics Inc. is a commercial biopharmaceutical company specializing in plasma-derived biologics used to treat patients with immune deficiencies and certain infectious disease risks. The company operates an integrated model that spans plasma collection, manufacturing, and commercialization, enabling control over key steps in the supply chain. Its primary business segments are ADMA BioManufacturing, which produces immunoglobulin and related plasma-based therapies, and Plasma Collection Centers, which secure source plasma for its products. Adma Biologics also sells plasma-derived intermediate fractions generated during its FDA-approved manufacturing processes and provides laboratory contracting services, with capabilities that include contract filling, labeling, and packing for select customers. The company serves healthcare providers and patients primarily in the United States, focusing on therapies for individuals with compromised or deficient immune systems who are at elevated risk for infections. Headquartered in Ramsey, New Jersey, Adma Biologics plays a specialized role in the biotechnology and healthcare sectors by supplying targeted plasma-derived therapeutic options.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 15, 2026 11:16am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$9.47
as of Aug 15, 11:09am (8d ago)
Change · Aug 15
+0.06 (+0.64%)
Day Range
$9.33 – $9.49
52-Week Range
$7.21 – $20.46
50-Day MA
$8.79
200-Day MA
$13.07
Volume
1,308,600.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 8d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 225,355,228.00
Float 219,652,816.00
Free Float 97.5%
High free float — 97.5% of shares trade freely, ~2.5% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:23am (8d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:23am (8d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
15.78
Stock Price: $9.47
EPS (Diluted): 0.60
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
4.86
Stock Price: $9.47
Total Equity: $477.32M
Shares: 244,904,640
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
11.24
Market Cap: $2.12B
Total Debt: $72.14M
Cash: $87.63M
EBITDA: $199.44M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$2.2B
Market Cap: $2.12B
Total Debt: $72.14M
Cash: $87.63M
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
57.4%
Gross Profit: $292.77M
Revenue: $510.17M
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
37.5%
Operating Income: $191.44M
Revenue: $510.17M
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
28.8%
Net Income: $146.93M
Revenue: $510.17M
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
30.8%
Net Income: $146.93M
Total Equity: $477.32M
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
33.3%
Operating Income: $191.44M
Tax Rate: 19.6%
Equity: $477.32M
Total Debt: $72.14M
Cash: $87.63M
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
6.71
Current Assets: $466.51M
Current Liabilities: $69.54M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.15
Short-Term Debt: $2.81M
Long-Term Debt: $69.33M
Total Debt: $72.14M
Total Equity: $477.32M
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$2.08
Revenue: $510.17M
Shares: 244,904,640
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$1.95
Total Equity: $477.32M
Shares: 244,904,640
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$0.11
Operating CF: $50.40M
CapEx: -$22.58M
Shares: 244,904,640
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
Last Dividend: $0.00
Stock Price: $9.47
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $146.93M
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 15, 2026 11:15am
Compares ADMA against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:23am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $80.9M $154.1M $258.2M $426.5M $510.2M
Cost of Revenue $79.8M $118.8M $169.3M $206.9M $217.4M
Gross Profit $1.2M $35.3M $88.9M $219.6M $292.8M
Operating Expenses $59.5M $74.6M $67.3M $80.6M $101.3M
Operating Income -$58.4M -$39.4M $21.6M $139.0M $191.4M
Net Income -$71.6M -$65.9M -$28.2M $197.7M $146.9M
EBITDA -$53.6M -$33.0M $29.2M $146.7M $199.4M
EPS $-0.51 $-0.33 $-0.13 $0.85 $0.62
EPS (Diluted) $-0.51 $-0.33 $-0.13 $0.81 $0.60
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:09am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $51.1M $86.5M $51.4M $103.1M $87.6M
Total Current Assets $208.7M $270.4M $257.0M $331.4M $466.5M
Total Assets $276.3M $348.5M $329.2M $488.7M $624.2M
Current Liabilities $30.4M $39.3M $49.8M $55.5M $69.5M
Long-Term Debt $72.3M $69.3M
Total Liabilities $135.1M $196.5M $194.0M $139.7M $146.9M
Total Equity $141.2M $152.0M $135.2M $349.0M $477.3M
Retained Earnings -$412.1M -$478.0M -$506.3M -$308.6M -$161.7M
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:23am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow -$112.4M -$59.5M $8.8M $118.7M $50.4M
Capital Expenditure -$13.5M -$13.9M -$4.8M -$8.2M -$22.6M
Free Cash Flow -$125.9M -$73.4M $4.0M $110.4M $27.8M
Acquisitions (net)
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $0 $151.8M $135.0M $0 $0
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks $0 $0 -$31.9M
Net Change in Cash -$4.8M $35.4M -$35.2M $51.8M -$15.5M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:23am (8d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +90.4% +67.6% +65.2% +19.6%
Gross Profit Growth +2,905.7% +152.2% +146.8% +33.3%
Operating Income Growth +32.6% +155.0% +542.5% +37.7%
Net Income Growth +8.0% +57.2% +800.0% -25.7%
EBITDA Growth +38.5% +188.7% +401.8% +36.0%
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable not yet run 12 computed · 6 not applicable · 6 not yet run
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for ADMA — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-15
The creme is there an opportunity here? Conditional opportunity
AI is not the reason to own or avoid ADMA — it's a quiet margin lever on a physically scarce asset base, with the only real AI risk arriving late and indirectly through non-plasma substitutes.
Exposure of 25 with position 58 says the honest finding is insulation: entrant compression 81 and scarcity migration 77 mean falling software cost cannot reproduce licensed fractionation capacity or a hyperimmune donor pool, while ai_margin_conversion 60 points to real yield-per-liter and donor-acquisition savings dropping through to a gross margin already at 57.4%. The condition is demand-side: watch price per gram and IVIG prior-authorization denial trends alongside FcRn-class label expansions — if grams stall while pricing softens, the insulated read becomes a slow-erosion read. Until then, judge this name on plasma supply and capacity execution, not on AI.
58
AI Position
Mildly favorable — physically insulated, AI is a COGS tweak not a thesis
ADMA's scarce assets are donor plasma, hyperimmune titer donors and an FDA-licensed fractionation plant — things cheap intelligence cannot manufacture, so AI shows up mainly as a modest yield/collection-cost tailwind and a slow, distant substitution risk from AI-accelerated recombinant alternatives.
Exposure 25 Confidence 72 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

Plasma collection and fractionation economics are yield- and labor-driven: AI-assisted donor recruitment, deferral prediction, center scheduling and pool/titer optimization raise grams of IgG per liter and per labor hour, and because plasma cost is largely fixed per donation, incremental yield falls almost entirely to gross profit.

Primary Pressure

Two indirect channels: AI-accelerated discovery and development of non-plasma alternatives (FcRn antagonists, engineered recombinant IgG, targeted biologics) that could erode IVIG volume growth in autoimmune/neurology indications late in the decade, and payer-side AI utilization management tightening prior authorization on an expensive, heavily managed therapy.

Critical Hinge

Whether IVIG demand keeps outrunning industry plasma supply. Observable: ADMA's gross margin per gram and yield-per-liter disclosures versus any softening in IVIG pricing or distributor demand as recombinant substitutes take share in specific indications.

Hard to Reproduce

FDA-licensed fractionation capacity, a validated multi-year-built plant, a proprietary high-titer RSV/hyperimmune donor network, and a physical footprint of licensed collection centers — capital, regulatory and biological assets untouched by falling software cost.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 91
Primary immunodeficiency patients require lifelong immunoglobulin replacement regardless of software cost.
The need is biological, chronic and life-sustaining; AI does not reduce the number of patients lacking functional antibody production. Some secondary/autoimmune uses are more contestable by other modalities.
PI diagnosis and treated-patient counts · share of revenue from PI vs autoimmune use · IVIG demand growth versus supply
relevance 62 · confidence 84
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 71
Plasma-derived polyclonal IgG remains the only practical route for the next five years.
No recombinant polyclonal immunoglobulin is near commercialization; substitution risk is indication-specific (FcRn agents in autoimmune) rather than a wholesale replacement of plasma-derived Ig.
recombinant polyclonal IgG clinical entries · FcRn-class label expansions · subcutaneous vs IV mix shifts
relevance 66 · confidence 66
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 61
Cheap intelligence can assist ADMA's operations but cannot copy a plasma supply chain.
The bottleneck input is human donors and licensed capacity; falling model cost helps process modeling and center operations without lowering the barrier to producing IgG.
yield-per-liter improvements disclosed · AI use in donor screening/titer selection · opex growth vs revenue growth
relevance 28 · confidence 70
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 79
ADMA is paid to carry biologics manufacturing, batch-release and FDA compliance liability.
Hospitals, distributors and payers cannot and will not internalize plasma sourcing, viral safety and lot release accountability; that liability is priced into the product and is unaffected by cheap software.
FDA inspection outcomes · batch release/recall events · pathogen-safety and donor screening record
relevance 44 · confidence 74
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 77
As information gets abundant, licensed plants and high-titer donor pools become relatively scarcer.
ADMA owns the physically constrained links — collection centers, a licensed Boca Raton fractionation facility, and a proprietary hyperimmune donor network for Asceniv — precisely the assets that cannot be scaled with compute.
collection center count and volumes · plant capacity expansion approvals · hyperimmune donor pool size
relevance 72 · confidence 73
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 87
No customer can plausibly self-manufacture a plasma-derived biologic.
Internalization would require donor networks, FDA licensure and fractionation capital; the DIY channel that threatens software vendors is structurally closed here.
hospital in-house compounding attempts · payer-sponsored alternative sourcing · group purchasing contract terms
relevance 22 · confidence 80
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 46
Agents don't route plasma, but AI-automated payer utilization review sits between ADMA and volume.
Demand is gated by prescriber choice and prior authorization; automated payer criteria enforcement can compress marginal IVIG utilization faster than clinical practice would, and ADMA does not control that layer.
prior-auth denial rates for IVIG · distributor order patterns · payer coverage policy revisions
relevance 38 · confidence 58
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 47
Donor titer and deferral data is useful internally but not a compounding external moat.
Screening and titer datasets can sharpen donor selection for hyperimmune products, a real operational edge; they do not create a network effect or licensable asset.
titer-based donor targeting programs · donor retention/deferral rates · Asceniv gross margin trend
relevance 30 · confidence 56
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 60
AI savings land in collection cost and center throughput, and largely stay as profit.
With gross margin already climbing 1.4%→57.4% on process and mix, further AI-driven donor-acquisition and scheduling gains accrue to ADMA because pricing is set by scarce industry supply, not vendor cost.
cost per liter collected · gross margin above 60% · SG&A as percent of revenue
relevance 46 · confidence 62
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 73
The monetized unit — grams of IgG at contracted price — is physical and hard to deflate.
Revenue is volume times price of a supply-constrained biologic, not seats or hours; AI cannot compress the unit, though modality substitution could eventually shrink the addressable gram count.
price per gram realized · volume growth vs capacity · payer contracting concessions
relevance 56 · confidence 68
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 81
Cheap software does nothing to shorten a multi-year, capital-heavy path to licensed fractionation.
New entrants need donor networks, plant construction and FDA licensure — barriers made of capital, time and regulation, not code; the competitive threat remains the existing plasma majors.
new fractionation capacity announcements · CSL/Grifols/Octapharma capacity adds · industry plasma collection supply
relevance 56 · confidence 72

AI Lens thesis

The customer need — immunoglobulin replacement for primary immune deficiency — is biological and persistent, and the product is a physical biologic derived from human donors, so no amount of cheap intelligence substitutes for the input or the licensed plant; AI reaches ADMA on the cost side (donor acquisition, center throughput, deferral and titer screening, process/yield modeling, and back-office scale as revenue grows faster than headcount) and only indirectly on the demand side, where AI-compressed drug development timelines could bring competing non-plasma modalities to more Ig indications sooner than the historical pace; the value ADMA creates from AI is retained rather than competed away because its bottleneck is plasma volume, not software features, and because rivals (CSL, Grifols, Octapharma) face the same physical constraint — meaning AI cannot be the reason to own or avoid this name, it is a few points of margin around a supply-and-price story.

Thesis breaker An accelerating shift of IVIG volume in autoimmune/neuro indications to recombinant or FcRn-class agents showing up as flat-to-down IVIG pricing and stalled ADMA volume growth would flip the insulated read into a slow disruption-target read.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside ADMA's profit is unusually leverage-sensitive to yield per liter and donor cost per litre; algorithmic donor targeting and deferral reduction across its own centers can move gross margin several points with no capital spend, an operating lever the market treats as process engineering rather than a repeatable compounding one.

Downside Payer and PBM AI-driven utilization review is an underrated volume tax on a high-cost, indication-fuzzy therapy — automated criteria enforcement can shrink off-label and marginal IVIG use faster than clinical substitution would.

Outcome range spread 29

41Bear case
58Central case
70Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-17 16:37

The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.

Holding A high-growth plasma story that just printed a flat quarter — earnings power is still expanding fast via ASCENIV mix and yield gains, but the top-line engine has decelerated to roughly zero, so the honest call is Holding with a positive earnings skew, well short of the ~38% the price assumes. conf 6/10
Inline with category Category growing · On a trailing-year basis ADMA grew 19.6% vs the category's 16.5% — a modest share gain. But the newest matched quarter shows revenue -0.3% while the category still runs mid-teens, meaning ADMA gave back its outperformance in the most recent period. So: share gain over the multi-year window, share give-back in the latest quarter, with earnings still expanding far faster than the category.
Next 2 quarters
Holding
The most recent print is flat revenue with a decelerating quarterly trend, and there is no evidence in hand of a volume catalyst landing inside two quarters. Earnings should keep looking strong on mix and yield — operating income up ~67% on flat sales — so the likely shape of the next two prints is soft-to-flat revenue with resilient EPS. That is Holding, not Growing.
≈ inline with expectations
Year 1
Growing
Across a full year the yield-enhancement and ASCENIV mix levers compound on an installed fixed base, and the category is still growing mid-teens. One flat quarter in a supply-gated business is more likely timing than trend, so the fiscal-year trajectory should be positive on revenue and materially positive on operating earnings — but well below the ~40% historical CAGR.
↓ below expectations
Years 2–3
Growing
Structurally the earnings power grows: the integrated collection-to-vial position and yield gains are durable, and IG demand is secular. But the two things that would justify sustained hyper-growth — meaningful volume expansion and stable price per gram — face the majors' incremental fractionation capacity. Growing, not Accelerating.
↓ below expectations
The creme: each rung's call measured against what's already printed (vs analyst estimates · vs guidance / FY consensus · vs price-implied growth) — expectations in print are already in the price, so only the variant margin can pay. Hover a rung's chip for the margin read.
Growth drivers
67 Mix shift to ASCENIV / high-margin specialty IG — Operating income +67% and net income +68.5% YoY on essentially flat revenue is the signature of mix and yield, not volume. That is a real, company-specific margin engine: the hyperimmune/specialty IG line carries far higher realized price per gram than standard IVIG, and each incremental point of mix drops through with little added fixed cost. This mechanism can keep earnings compounding even in a flat-revenue quarter.
54 Vertically integrated plasma-to-vial control — Owning collection centers plus fill-finish is a genuine structural asset in this category: it de-risks the single input (source plasma) that gates every IG producer's volume, and yield-enhancement process gains convert the same liter of plasma into more grams of sellable product. This is the only durable lever ADMA has that the majors cannot simply out-spend it on in the near term.
44 Capacity/throughput runway ahead of demand — Manufacturing and collection-center scaling is already sunk; incremental output rides an existing fixed base, so if plasma inflow normalizes, revenue can re-inflect without a step-change in capex. Multi-year revenue CAGR of ~40.6% and FCF CAGR >150% show the model converts throughput into cash once released.
38 Category is growing, and ADMA has been outgrowing it — Industry recent YoY 16.5% vs long-term 6.3% CAGR; ADMA's trailing YoY 19.6% is ~3.2pp above the category. Immunodeficiency diagnosis rates and IG utilization are secular, not cyclical, demand — the underlying category tide is not the problem here.
Growth risks
75 Top line has decelerated to flat — the sharpest signal in the file — Matched-quarter revenue -0.3% YoY against a category growing ~16.5% is a share-loss shape for that quarter, and the revenue-confidence work independently flags the quarterly trend as 'decelerating'. Whether the cause is plasma inflow timing, batch release, or realized price, a single-product-family company cannot print flat revenue for long without the earnings leverage story losing its fuel.
60 IG pricing and capacity from the majors — CSL, Grifols and Octapharma have been adding plasma collection and fractionation capacity. Looser industry plasma supply historically compresses IG price per gram, and ADMA's entire earnings inflection rests on realized price and mix rather than volume. A pricing normalization hits the exact line item doing all the work.
47 Narrow product and channel concentration — Revenue concentrates in a handful of plasma-derived products sold through a limited specialty channel. One manufacturing deviation, FDA observation, or distributor destocking event moves a whole quarter — visible in the erratic print history (a -211% EPS miss in Nov-25 alongside beats elsewhere). Low visibility cuts both ways but caps how directional a call can honestly be.
28 Industry-wide margin compression and sector contraction — Landscape shows operating and net margins compressing across the industry, and the sector demand cycle reads contraction (score -2). ADMA is currently moving against that on margin, which is impressive but statistically hard to sustain; macro headwinds with 10y at 4.63 also raise the cost of any further capacity build.
Immunoglobulin demand is one of the more insulated pockets of healthcare: chronic, prescribed, largely reimbursed, and gated by plasma supply rather than by consumer discretion. That makes the world backdrop — macro headwinds, a biotech sector in demand contraction, funding stress — less relevant to ADMA than to the average name in its sector, because ADMA is a commercial manufacturer, not a clinical-stage capital consumer. The real world variable is plasma economics: donor compensation costs, collection center throughput, and how much new fractionation capacity the majors bring online. That single variable sets IG price per gram, and IG price per gram sets ADMA's whole earnings inflection. Rates at 4.63% matter only insofar as they price further capacity expansion, which is largely already built.
Growth position composite -7
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
50Next 2 quarters · Holding
70Year 1 · Growing
70Years 2–3 · Growing
-7Composite (−100…+100)
A research prediction, not advice. Forward-graded: each rung is scored against the prints that follow it. Not an input to the GEM designation — track record first.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-15 11:22:33
Verdict Moderately undervalued at $9.47 — fair value $12-14 on 11-12x forward earnings of ~$175M; synthesis DCF of $4.48 ignores continuing margin expansion evident in Q1'26's 39.6% net margin. Watch Q2'26 revenue for confirmation.

The raw numbers tell a genuinely impressive story that the synthesis model is undervaluing. Revenue has gone from $80.9M (2021) to $510.2M (2025) — a 6.3x jump in four years — with gross margins expanding from 1.5% to 57.4% and operating margins from -72% to +37.5%. The quarterly trajectory shows revenue steadying in the $114-139M range with net margin climbing from 23.4% in Q1'25 to 39.6% in Q1'26. That's not decelerating profitability — that's operating leverage kicking in on a stable revenue base. ROIC of 33% and ROE of 31% on a debt/equity of 0.15 with a current ratio of 6.7 is a genuinely pristine balance sheet. This is not a "poor cash flow quality" business in any conventional sense — OCF of $50.4M on $146.9M net income does show a working-capital drag (likely inventory build for BIVIGAM/ASCENIV volume), but that's a growth-stage feature, not accounting shenanigans.

Where I diverge sharply from the Valuation Synthesis: a $4.48 DCF fair value implies the model is assuming margin reversion to something like 15-20% steady-state and near-zero volume growth. On 2025 net income of $146.9M, the current $2.12B market cap is 14.4x trailing earnings — for a company that grew revenue 19.6% YoY and expanded net margin ~1600bps sequentially over four quarters. If you assume 2026 revenue lands at $500-550M with 35% net margin (below the most recent quarter), you get $175-190M in earnings, and the stock trades at ~11x forward. The synthesis verdict of "overvalued by 52.7%" would require you to believe ADMA's margin structure collapses back toward 2023 levels, which contradicts the Q1'26 print showing the opposite. The Pre-Flight model correctly identifies this — the market is pricing in mean reversion that the data doesn't support yet.

The contrarian case does exist, though, and it's worth taking seriously. The 2024-12-31 quarter showed $111.9M NI on $117.5M revenue (95% margin) — that's a tax benefit or one-time item distorting the annual comp; strip it out and 2024 "real" earnings were closer to $85-100M, making the 2025 growth less dramatic. Recent earnings YoY of -25.7% is real if you're comparing against that inflated Q4'24. Second, plasma-derived Ig is a commoditized market where CSL, Grifols, and Takeda are 10-50x ADMA's size and can absorb pricing pressure indefinitely; ADMA's scarcity-value narrative around ASCENIV (hyperimmune for immunocompromised) is real but the TAM is narrow. Third, insider activity is mixed — the P-Purchases are tiny (6,400 and 12,500 shares) and the awards/gifts/sales pattern looks like routine comp, not conviction buying. Fourth, revenue sequentially declined from $139.2M in Q4'25 to $114.5M in Q1'26 (-17.7%), which could be seasonality or could be the leading edge of the pricing pressure bears warn about.

My verdict: the synthesis model is anchoring too hard on DCF steady-state and ignoring that operating margins are still expanding in real-time. At $9.47, ADMA trades at ~11-12x forward earnings for a business with 30%+ ROIC, net cash position, and revenue that 5x'd in four years. Fair value is closer to $12-14 (15-16x forward $175M NI) than to $4.48 — the synthesis is off by roughly 2.5-3x on the low side, in my read. That said, the Q1'26 sequential revenue decline is a real yellow flag; if Q2'26 confirms deceleration below $120M with margin compression, the bear case activates and $6-7 becomes the floor. This is a "moderately undervalued, watch the next print" setup, not a table-pounder — the story is anchored to fundamentals that are still improving, but the market's skepticism about durability isn't crazy given how commoditized the end market is.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-15 11:22:51
Verdict Undervalued at $9.47 — the market is pricing ADMA as if 2025 margins are transient, but current profitability and balance-sheet strength support a fair value in the low-to-mid teens.

ADMA does not read like a typical biotech at all; it reads like a small, newly scaled specialty manufacturer that has finally crossed the absorption threshold where fixed costs stop crushing the P&L. The raw operating trajectory is the first thing that matters here. Revenue went from $80.9M in 2021 to $510.2M in 2025, a 6x jump in four years, while gross profit expanded from essentially breakeven at $1.2M to $292.8M. Even more important, that improvement has held at scale: 2025 operating income was $191.4M, a 37.5% operating margin, versus just $21.6M in 2023. Quarterly revenue has flattened somewhat around the $114M-$139M range over the last five quarters, but profitability has not rolled over; excluding the obvious one-time distortion in 4Q24 net income of $111.9M on $117.5M of sales, quarterly net margins have still generally lived in the high-20s to mid-30s, culminating in 1Q26 net income of $45.3M on $114.5M of revenue, or 39.6%. That is not the profile of a business with “razor-thin margins”; it is the profile of a constrained-supply product business with real operating leverage.

Valuation also looks much less demanding than the bearish models imply. At $2.12B market cap and $9.47 per share, the stock sits at 4.5x 2025 sales, 15.8x earnings, and 11.2x EV/EBITDA, with net cash roughly neutral once $87.6M of cash is offset against $72.1M of debt. For a company that grew revenue 20% in the latest quarter year over year and has moved from losses in 2023 to roughly $147M of 2025 net income, that is not expensive. If anything, the market is already discounting a meaningful normalization of margins. The key interpretive issue is cash flow quality: operating cash flow of $50.4M and free cash flow of $27.8M lag reported earnings badly. I do not ignore that, but for this specific business I weigh earnings more heavily than a one-year FCF snapshot because capex of $22.6M and likely working-capital swings are part of a capacity build and inventory-intensive plasma model. A business moving from $146.9M of net income to only $27.8M of free cash flow deserves scrutiny, but it does not automatically mean the earnings are fictitious when the balance sheet is strong, the current ratio is 6.7, and leverage is modest at 0.15x debt to equity.

What stands out to me is that the stock price seems to reflect disbelief in durability more than evidence of deterioration. The latest quarter’s revenue of $114.5M was basically flat versus $114.8M a year earlier, so the top line has clearly decelerated from the explosive phase, and recent earnings were down year over year against a tougher comparison. But even on that flatter revenue base, net income rose sharply sequentially from $26.9M in 1Q25 to $45.3M in 1Q26, suggesting mix, manufacturing efficiency, or lower cost inputs are still improving. That matters because if ADMA can simply hold annualized revenue around the current run rate of roughly $460M-$500M while sustaining net margins above 25%, the stock is already trading around a mid-teens earnings multiple on a de-risked balance sheet. For a niche healthcare manufacturer with ROIC above 33% and ROE above 30%, that is too cheap unless profits are peaking right now. The insider tape, while not huge, also leans supportive: there were open-market purchases in May 2026 rather than a stream of discretionary sales into strength.

The smartest bear case is straightforward and serious: the market may be correctly treating 2025 as peak economics. Revenue growth has slowed materially, recent quarterly sales have stalled, and the gap between net income ($146.9M) and operating cash flow ($50.4M) is too large to wave away. If working capital keeps consuming cash and capex remains necessary to support production, the earnings multiple is overstating owner earnings power. There is also no escaping that this is a small player in a plasma-derived products market dominated by much larger competitors, and the extraordinary step-up from gross margin of 34.4% in 2023 to 57.4% in 2025 may invite competition, payer pressure, or simple mean reversion. On that view, 4.5x sales is not cheap for a business whose best growth phase is over. I weigh those points differently because even after haircutting 2025 earnings heavily, the enterprise is not priced for much success: if normalized net income is $100M rather than $147M, the stock is still around 21x earnings for a profitable, balance-sheet-clean company that has proven it can manufacture at scale. That is not a bargain-basement multiple, but it is far from the kind of overvaluation that justifies a fair value in the $4-$5 range.

What would change my mind is evidence that the margin story is accounting-deep rather than cash-deep. If the next few quarters show revenue slipping below $110M while net margins fall back toward the teens and operating cash flow continues to trail net income by $20M-$30M per quarter, I would conclude 2025 was the crest and that the current multiple is too high. Likewise, if capex and inventory needs keep free cash flow near zero despite reported profitability, the equity deserves a lower earnings multiple. Conversely, if ADMA can produce another 12 months around $500M revenue, keep operating margin above 30%, and convert even half of net income into free cash flow, this stock should not be sitting under 16x earnings.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-15 11:23:34
Verdict Modestly undervalued at $9.47; 15.8x P/E and 11x EV/EBITDA underprice durable 30%+ ROIC and mid-30s operating margins once FCF conversion normalizes

The numbers describe a company that has completed a genuine operating turnaround and is now being priced as if that turnaround is about to reverse. Revenue scaled from $80.9M in 2021 to $510.2M in 2025, a 40.6% CAGR, while the business flipped from a $71.6M net loss to $146.9M of net income and a 28.8% net margin. Gross margin sits at 57.4% and operating margin at 37.5%, with ROE of 30.8% and ROIC of 33.4% on a clean balance sheet ($87.6M cash, $72.1M debt, debt-to-equity 0.15, current ratio 6.7). The 2024 net income of $197.7M was inflated by a one-time Q4 item that produced a 95% margin; strip that out and 2025’s $146.9M looks like real, improved earnings power rather than mean reversion. At $9.47 and a $2.12B market cap the stock trades at 15.8x trailing earnings, 4.5x sales and 11.2x EV/EBITDA—multiples that are undemanding for a vertically integrated plasma player posting mid-to-high-thirties operating margins.

What stands out on the recent tape is deceleration, not collapse. Q1 2026 revenue of $114.5M was essentially flat with the year-earlier $114.8M and down sequentially from Q4’s $139.2M, confirming the 19.6% recent revenue growth rate is already slowing from the multi-year CAGR. Yet that same quarter delivered a 39.6% net margin—the highest clean margin in the series—so the profit engine is still expanding even as volume growth cools. Free-cash-flow conversion is the clear soft spot: only $27.8M of FCF on $146.9M of net income and $50.4M of operating cash flow after $22.6M of capex. That gap is consistent with working-capital build in a plasma-collection and manufacturing ramp rather than accounting fiction, but it is real and it keeps the cash-flow-based valuation fragile.

I reject the prior model’s $4.48 fair-value conclusion. A composite that marks the stock 53% overvalued while the company earns a 33% ROIC, carries almost no leverage, and still grows high-teens on the top line is overweighting one year of imperfect cash conversion and an assumed sector contraction that the company’s own margins are not yet reflecting. The 53% drawdown from the $20.46 high already embeds deep skepticism about sustainability; at 15.8x earnings the market is not paying for perfection.

The strongest counter-argument is straightforward: cash flow quality is poor, revenue is decelerating, and the company competes against far larger, better-capitalized plasma majors. If the Q1 stall is the start of a volume plateau rather than seasonality, and if immunoglobulin pricing compresses, the 57% gross margin and the entire scarcity narrative around the integrated model erode quickly. In that world the stock is worth closer to 8–10x a lower earnings base and the current price is too high. I weigh that risk as material but secondary to the evidence already in hand—margin expansion continuing into the slowdown, fortress liquidity, and insider open-market purchases in May 2026—because the operating leverage has already been demonstrated across multiple quarters, not promised.

My mind changes if two consecutive quarters show revenue declining year-over-year while gross margin falls below 50%, or if full-year 2026 free cash flow remains under $40M despite flat-to-up earnings. Either print would confirm that the earnings are low-quality and the multiple compression thesis is correct.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 8.3; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 8.0
undervalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 7.0
GPT gpt-5.4 9.0
undervalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.7 vs panel · self: 7.0
Grok grok-4.5 8.0
undervalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 6.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), plus AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-15 11:33:43
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality - starter only, wait for a dip 6/10
Real turnaround, real profits, but the price already pays for the next three years - I want it cheaper before I commit size.
The cruxWhether 2025's 57% GM and 37% OpM prove durable and cash-convertible - if yes the panel is right and $9.47 is fine; if margins are peak or earnings-quality flags bite, the composite $5.17 FV is right.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from ADMA's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionHeavy Dilution
Earnings QualityWeak — Some Red Flags
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+16
Solid
edge √Σ 110 · risk √Σ 94 · conf 7/10

ADMA has undergone a genuine operational transformation: revenue compounded from $80.9M (2021) to $510.2M (2025), gross margin expanded from 1.4% to 57.4%, and operating margin flipped from -72.1% to +37.5%. Net income turned positive in 2024 ($197.7M, aided by a likely deferred tax asset release) and normalized to $146.9M in 2025. This is not a speculative biotech - it is a scaled, profitable specialty plasma products company with Altman Z of 10.89 and a self-funding FCF profile ($27.8M in 2025, $110.4M in 2024).

Strengths 3
m80
Operating leverage inflection is real
GM went 1.4% -> 22.9% -> 34.4% -> 51.5% -> 57.4% while revenue 6x'd. OpM from -72% to +37.5%. This is genuine scale economics in plasma manufacturing, not accounting.
m60
Balance sheet safety
Altman Z of 10.89 (deep safe zone), $87.6M liquid cash, $15.5M net cash, and positive FCF - survival risk is off the table.
m45
Insider open-market buying
Director Grossman bought ~$250K across three May 2026 tranches at ~$8/share - actual cash-in-pocket conviction, not just routine grants.
Concerns 3
m70
Heavy historical dilution
Share count 139.6M -> 244.9M (75% increase) over five years. Per-share compounding is materially handicapped versus enterprise growth; buybacks recover only 65.8% of SBC.
m55
GAAP earnings outrunning cash
2025 NI $146.9M vs FCF $27.8M (OCF/NI 0.62x); 2024 NI $197.7M was inflated by what appears to be a tax-asset release. Accruals at 6.7% of assets and Beneish -0.17 flag warrant scrutiny of working capital and deferred taxes.
m30
Single-therapeutic-category exposure
Business is concentrated in immunoglobulin/plasma products - durability depends on plasma supply, ASCENIV uptake, and pricing that raw data cannot verify.
This is a real turnaround executed - a specialty biologics company that actually crossed the chasm from cash-burning to structurally profitable, and the margin ladder shows why. I take the business itself as Solid and improving. My hesitations are two: the cash-versus-earnings gap in 2025 is wider than I want to see for a company this scaled, and the equity currency was used aggressively on the way up (share count up 75% in five years) - so on a per-share basis the underlying economics get diluted. Insider buying in May 2026 is a genuine positive signal from someone with information I do not have. If the next two years show cleaner OCF/NI conversion and disciplined share count, this graduates to Strong; if working capital keeps swallowing earnings, it stays here.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • Working capital drivers in 2025 - is inventory build for plasma/ASCENIV the reason OCF trails NI, and is it strategic vs stuck?
  • Magnitude and timing of the 2024 deferred tax asset release inflating that year's net income
  • Customer/payer concentration and any single-plasma-center dependency
  • Convertible or warrant overhang from prior financing rounds that drove 15.1% share growth
  • SBC run-rate going forward now that the company is profitable - is dilution normalizing?
  • Segment detail on ASCENIV vs BIVIGAM contribution and pricing durability
Valuation / Mispricing
-66
Rich
edge √Σ 20 · risk √Σ 100 · conf 6/10
Price $9.47 vs deserved ~$5.00-5.50; the stock trades at roughly 1.8-1.9x model fair value with negative margin of safety. attractive below $6.00

The composite fair value lands at $5.17 and the signal-adjusted FV at $4.48, implying downside of roughly 45-53% from $9.47. Both underlying methods agree tightly (DCF $5.03, EPV floor $5.45), so this is not a runaway-method problem - the models see a business worth roughly half the quoted price. Even generously flexing assumptions for the improving margin ladder and rare integrated plasma-to-product footprint, closing a ~$4 per share gap requires either a step-change in immunoglobulin volumes or durable pricing that the bear case explicitly disputes given CSL/Grifols/Octapharma scale. Company quality is Solid, which lifts deserved value modestly above pure EPV - but the earnings-quality haircut (score -1, cash vs earnings gap in 2025) pulls the other way. Net-net, a deserved value in the $5-6 range is defensible; $9.47 is not, unless you underwrite a multi-year growth runway well beyond what the composite captures. The $2.1B market cap is pricing the turnaround as substantially complete and extrapolating.

Cheap signals 1
m20
Solid business quality lifts floor modestly
A structurally profitable integrated plasma-to-product operator deserves a premium to pure EPV; that argues deserved value sits at the top of the $5-6 range, not below EPV - but not near $9.47.
Rich / priced-in 3
m72
Both methods point ~45%+ below price
DCF ($5.03) and EPV floor ($5.45) converge in a tight band; composite $5.17 vs $9.47 = -45% upside. Two independent lenses agreeing is a stronger rich signal than one runaway number.
m60
Priced as if the turnaround extrapolates linearly
At 2.1x sales on razor-thin margins with big plasma majors competing, the price already embeds continued volume growth AND margin expansion. Signal-adjusted FV of $4.48 implies the market is paying for outcomes not yet in the numbers.
m35
Earnings-quality haircut argues for lower, not higher, deserved value
The -1 quality flag and cash-vs-earnings gap in 2025 mean the reported profitability that props up the bull case deserves a discount, not a premium.
I like the business more than I like the stock. At $9.47 I am being asked to pay roughly double what two conservative methods say the company is worth, and the earnings-quality flag says even those numbers may be flattering. A Solid biologics turnaround is worth a premium to EPV, but not an 80% premium. I would need to see this in the $5-6 zone before the math works; anywhere near $9-10 the market has already collected the turnaround dividend and is now underwriting the next leg on faith.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Ig volume growth trajectory and pricing in next 2 quarters
  • Free cash flow conversion vs GAAP earnings (the 2025 gap)
  • Any signal of renewed equity issuance given prior heavy dilution
  • Gross margin durability as capacity scales
General Sentiment
+34
Tailwind
tail √Σ 87 · head √Σ 51 · conf 6/10

ADMA sits inside a moderate turnaround narrative that has already done a lot of work - the stock is up on a 40.6% CAGR and trades at a 111% premium to DCF, meaning sentiment, not fundamentals, is doing the lifting. The risk-on tape (VIX 14.3, S&P near highs) is a supportive backdrop for a small-cap biotech that has crossed into profitability; investors are willing to pay for the 'scarcity value of integrated plasma capacity' story in a calm market. Beta of 0.77 mutes macro whiplash either way, so the higher-rates headwind lands only lightly here. The pressure is tilted positive but softening. Recent 19.6% trailing return versus the 40.6% long-term CAGR signals the narrative is losing intensity - the easy re-rating is behind it, and the story now needs fresh proof points (volume, margin) to keep the premium. Narrative durability is only moderate and the cult coefficient is low, so there is no fan base to defend the name if execution wobbles or if a plasma major cuts price. Net: still a tailwind, but a fading one, not a mania.

Tailwinds 3
m45
Risk-on tape supports small-cap biotech
VIX at 14.3 and S&P near highs create a hospitable backdrop for a profitable small-cap growth story like ADMA; risk-on tapes reward turnaround names that have already proven cash generation.
m50
Turnaround narrative still intact
The 'operational profitability plus scarce integrated plasma capacity' story is moderate-intensity and moderate-durability - enough to sustain a large premium to DCF but not euphoric.
m55
Strong multi-year momentum
40.6% CAGR and +39.7pp over 3 years mean flows and trend-followers are still on this name; momentum itself is a self-reinforcing pressure in a calm tape.
Headwinds 3
m40
Narrative cooling from peak
Recent 19.6% trailing return well below the 40.6% long-term CAGR indicates the story is losing thrust - the re-rating engine is slowing and the name needs fresh catalysts to hold the premium.
m25
Low cult, no fan base to defend
Cult coefficient is low, so if execution stumbles or a plasma major moves on price, there is no retail army or true-believer base to absorb selling.
m20
Higher-rates backdrop, muted by low beta
10y at 4.63% and market PE 26.2 pressure long-duration equities, but beta 0.77 and current profitability make this a light touch, not a squeeze.
Net leans tailwind but softer than the headline momentum suggests. The macro tape is friendly, the turnaround narrative is intact, and low beta insulates ADMA from the rates headwind - so pressure is pushing up. But the story is mid-cycle, not early, and the recent deceleration says the marginal buyer is getting harder to find. I would call this a moderate tailwind that is one disappointing print away from flipping to balanced.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Whether quarterly volume and margin prints reinforce or crack the margin-expansion story
  • Any pricing action from CSL, Grifols, or Octapharma that would puncture the scarcity narrative
  • Analyst target revisions - whether tone is still catching up to price or starting to fade
  • Whether the recent deceleration in trailing return extends into an outright breakdown of the trend
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+44
Mildly favorable — physically insulated, AI is a COGS tweak not a thesis
opp √Σ 89 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 7/10

The customer need — immunoglobulin replacement for primary immune deficiency — is biological and persistent, and the product is a physical biologic derived from human donors, so no amount of cheap intelligence substitutes for the input or the licensed plant; AI reaches ADMA on the cost side (donor acquisition, center throughput, deferral and titer screening, process/yield modeling, and back-office scale as revenue grows faster than headcount) and only indirectly on the demand side, where AI-compressed drug development timelines could bring competing non-plasma modalities to more Ig indications sooner than the historical pace; the value ADMA creates from AI is retained rather than competed away because its bottleneck is plasma volume, not software features, and because rivals (CSL, Grifols, Octapharma) face the same physical constraint — meaning AI cannot be the reason to own or avoid this name, it is a few points of margin around a supply-and-price story.

AI opportunities 9
m51
Underlying Need Persistence
Primary immunodeficiency patients require lifelong immunoglobulin replacement regardless of software cost.
m28
Solution Persistence
Plasma-derived polyclonal IgG remains the only practical route for the next five years.
m6
Intelligence Commoditization
Cheap intelligence can assist ADMA's operations but cannot copy a plasma supply chain.
m26
Responsibility Transfer
ADMA is paid to carry biologics manufacturing, batch-release and FDA compliance liability.
m39
Scarcity Migration
As information gets abundant, licensed plants and high-titer donor pools become relatively scarcer.
m16
Customer DIY Preference
No customer can plausibly self-manufacture a plasma-derived biologic.
m9
AI Margin Conversion
AI savings land in collection cost and center throughput, and largely stay as profit.
m26
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit — grams of IgG at contracted price — is physical and hard to deflate.
m35
Entrant Compression
Cheap software does nothing to shorten a multi-year, capital-heavy path to licensed fractionation.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

AI is not the reason to own or avoid ADMA — it's a quiet margin lever on a physically scarce asset base, with the only real AI risk arriving late and indirectly through non-plasma substitutes. Exposure of 25 with position 58 says the honest finding is insulation: entrant compression 81 and scarcity migration 77 mean falling software cost cannot reproduce licensed fractionation capacity or a hyperimmune donor pool, while ai_margin_conversion 60 points to real yield-per-liter and donor-acquisition savings dropping through to a gross margin already at 57.4%. The condition is demand-side: watch price per gram and IVIG prior-authorization denial trends alongside FcRn-class label expansions — if grams stall while pricing softens, the insulated read becomes a slow-erosion read. Until then, judge this name on plasma supply and capacity execution, not on AI.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • collection center count and volumes
  • plant capacity expansion approvals
  • hyperimmune donor pool size
  • recombinant polyclonal IgG clinical entries
  • FcRn-class label expansions
  • subcutaneous vs IV mix shifts
  • PI diagnosis and treated-patient counts
  • share of revenue from PI vs autoimmune use
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Growth Outlook
-7
Holding
edge √Σ 104 · risk √Σ 111 · conf 6/10

Immunoglobulin demand is one of the more insulated pockets of healthcare: chronic, prescribed, largely reimbursed, and gated by plasma supply rather than by consumer discretion. That makes the world backdrop — macro headwinds, a biotech sector in demand contraction, funding stress — less relevant to ADMA than to the average name in its sector, because ADMA is a commercial manufacturer, not a clinical-stage capital consumer. The real world variable is plasma economics: donor compensation costs, collection center throughput, and how much new fractionation capacity the majors bring online. That single variable sets IG price per gram, and IG price per gram sets ADMA's whole earnings inflection. Rates at 4.63% matter only insofar as they price further capacity expansion, which is largely already built.

Growth drivers 4
m67
Mix shift to ASCENIV / high-margin specialty IG
Operating income +67% and net income +68.5% YoY on essentially flat revenue is the signature of mix and yield, not volume. That is a real, company-specific margin engine: the hyperimmune/specialty IG line carries far higher realized price per gram than standard IVIG, and each incremental point of mix drops through with little added fixed cost. This mechanism can keep earnings compounding even in a flat-revenue quarter.
m54
Vertically integrated plasma-to-vial control
Owning collection centers plus fill-finish is a genuine structural asset in this category: it de-risks the single input (source plasma) that gates every IG producer's volume, and yield-enhancement process gains convert the same liter of plasma into more grams of sellable product. This is the only durable lever ADMA has that the majors cannot simply out-spend it on in the near term.
m44
Capacity/throughput runway ahead of demand
Manufacturing and collection-center scaling is already sunk; incremental output rides an existing fixed base, so if plasma inflow normalizes, revenue can re-inflect without a step-change in capex. Multi-year revenue CAGR of ~40.6% and FCF CAGR >150% show the model converts throughput into cash once released.
m38
Category is growing, and ADMA has been outgrowing it
Industry recent YoY 16.5% vs long-term 6.3% CAGR; ADMA's trailing YoY 19.6% is ~3.2pp above the category. Immunodeficiency diagnosis rates and IG utilization are secular, not cyclical, demand — the underlying category tide is not the problem here.
Growth risks 4
m75
Top line has decelerated to flat — the sharpest signal in the file
Matched-quarter revenue -0.3% YoY against a category growing ~16.5% is a share-loss shape for that quarter, and the revenue-confidence work independently flags the quarterly trend as 'decelerating'. Whether the cause is plasma inflow timing, batch release, or realized price, a single-product-family company cannot print flat revenue for long without the earnings leverage story losing its fuel.
m60
IG pricing and capacity from the majors
CSL, Grifols and Octapharma have been adding plasma collection and fractionation capacity. Looser industry plasma supply historically compresses IG price per gram, and ADMA's entire earnings inflection rests on realized price and mix rather than volume. A pricing normalization hits the exact line item doing all the work.
m47
Narrow product and channel concentration
Revenue concentrates in a handful of plasma-derived products sold through a limited specialty channel. One manufacturing deviation, FDA observation, or distributor destocking event moves a whole quarter — visible in the erratic print history (a -211% EPS miss in Nov-25 alongside beats elsewhere). Low visibility cuts both ways but caps how directional a call can honestly be.
m28
Industry-wide margin compression and sector contraction
Landscape shows operating and net margins compressing across the industry, and the sector demand cycle reads contraction (score -2). ADMA is currently moving against that on margin, which is impressive but statistically hard to sustain; macro headwinds with 10y at 4.63 also raise the cost of any further capacity build.
vs expectations: ~6m inline · 1y below · 2-3y below
The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Unavailable View weakness chain →

Prediction unavailable. valuation-synthesis has no result for ADMA — the prediction needs its fair-value anchors.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for ADMA. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.562 · 9b2927c4 · 2026-08-22 16:52:06