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
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc (ALNY) — 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 Watch · Gem Score -12 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 32 · Value -48 · Sentiment -45 (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.

Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc

ALNY NASDAQ
Healthcare · Biotechnology
Cambridge, MA 02142, United States alnylam.com Updated Aug 15, 11:03am
Price
$228.65
Market Cap
$30.6B
Employees
2,500
Beta
0.28
Avg Volume
2,095,946
CEO
Dr. Yvonne L. Greenstreet M.B.A., M.D.

Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc is a global biopharmaceutical company specializing in the discovery, development, manufacturing, and commercialization of therapeutics based on RNA interference technology. The company focuses on treating genetically defined and other hard-to-treat diseases by silencing specific genes implicated in disease pathways. Its commercial portfolio includes approved RNAi medicines for rare conditions such as hereditary transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis and primary hyperoxaluria type 1, alongside therapies targeting acute hepatic porphyria and other metabolic and cardiovascular disorders. Alnylam also maintains a broad clinical pipeline in cardiometabolic disease, neuroscience, and hematology, aiming to address areas of high unmet medical need with targeted RNAi-based approaches. The company works across the United States, Europe, and other international markets, supported by strategic collaborations with healthcare providers, commercial partners, and technology firms. Founded in 2002 and headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals today plays a central role in bringing RNAi therapeutics into routine medical practice and is widely regarded as a pioneer in this modality.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 15, 2026 11:11am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$228.65
as of Aug 15, 11:20am (8d ago)
Change · Aug 15
+1.53 (+0.67%)
Day Range
$220.23 – $228.98
52-Week Range
$197.81 – $495.55
50-Day MA
$273.17
200-Day MA
$336.70
Volume
1,525,800.00
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 133,734,000.00
Float 127,937,574.00
Free Float 95.7%
High free float — 95.7% of shares trade freely, ~4.3% 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 11:20am (8d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:20am (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
Industry comparison last run: Aug 15, 2026 11:09am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
98.13
Stock Price: $228.65
EPS (Diluted): 2.33
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
39.02
Stock Price: $228.65
Total Equity: $789.18M
Shares: 134,684,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
50.78
Market Cap: $30.60B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.66B
EBITDA: $557.24M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$28.3B
Market Cap: $30.60B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.66B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
81.8%
Gross Profit: $3.04B
Revenue: $3.71B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
13.5%
Operating Income: $501.58M
Revenue: $3.71B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
8.4%
Net Income: $313.75M
Revenue: $3.71B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
39.8%
Net Income: $313.75M
Total Equity: $789.18M
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
-56.1%
Operating Income: $501.58M
Tax Rate: 2.9%
Equity: $789.18M
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.66B
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
2.76
Current Assets: $4.05B
Current Liabilities: $1.47B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $789.18M
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$27.58
Revenue: $3.71B
Shares: 134,684,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$5.86
Total Equity: $789.18M
Shares: 134,684,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$3.46
Operating CF: $524.08M
CapEx: -$58.70M
Shares: 134,684,000
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: $228.65
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $313.75M
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 15, 2026 11:09am
Compares ALNY 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 11:20am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $844.3M $1.0B $1.8B $2.2B $3.7B
Cost of Revenue $115.0M $140.2M $268.2M $306.5M $677.2M
Gross Profit $729.3M $897.2M $1.6B $1.9B $3.0B
Operating Expenses $1.4B $1.7B $1.8B $2.1B $2.5B
Operating Income -$708.7M -$785.1M -$282.2M -$176.9M $501.6M
Net Income -$852.8M -$1.1B -$440.2M -$278.2M $313.7M
EBITDA -$661.1M -$740.6M -$228.1M -$120.2M $557.2M
EPS $-7.20 $-9.30 $-3.52 $-2.18 $2.39
EPS (Diluted) $-7.20 $-9.30 $-3.52 $-2.18 $2.33
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:03am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $820.0M $866.4M $812.7M $966.4M $1.7B
Total Current Assets $2.8B $2.7B $3.0B $3.3B $4.1B
Total Assets $3.6B $3.5B $3.8B $4.2B $5.0B
Current Liabilities $695.7M $767.9M $967.8M $1.2B $1.5B
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $3.1B $3.7B $4.1B $4.2B $4.2B
Total Equity $588.2M -$158.2M -$220.6M $67.1M $789.2M
Retained Earnings -$5.4B -$6.6B -$7.0B -$7.3B -$6.7B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:20am (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow -$641.7M -$541.3M $104.2M -$8.3M $524.1M
Capital Expenditure -$76.4M -$72.1M -$62.2M -$34.3M -$58.7M
Free Cash Flow -$718.1M -$613.3M $41.9M -$42.6M $465.4M
Acquisitions (net)
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $0 -$762.1M
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks
Net Change in Cash $323.1M $46.4M -$53.7M $153.8M $690.2M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 11:20am (8d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +22.9% +76.2% +23.0% +65.2%
Gross Profit Growth +23.0% +73.9% +24.5% +56.4%
Operating Income Growth -10.8% +64.1% +37.3% +383.6%
Net Income Growth -32.6% +61.1% +36.8% +212.8%
EBITDA Growth -12.0% +69.2% +47.3% +563.5%
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 ALNY — 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
Alnylam is the rare biotech where AI shows up as more diagnosed customers rather than cheaper substitutes — but the annuity is only safe until an AI-accelerated one-shot cure reads out.
Position 61 with a 37-78 spread: the revenue unit (high-priced treated patient-year) is structurally deflation-proof, and AI cardiac screening is quietly expanding the ATTR pool into an already-approved label just as operating margin flipped positive (13.5% on 82% GM) — that combination converts AI directly into units and profit. The kill switch is entrant_compression at 41: cheap design plus Alnylam's own target validation shortens rivals' path, and editing platforms monetize by ending chronic dosing. Watch disclosed new ATTR-CM diagnosis/initiation rates against competing Phase 3 durability data — that race, not any AI product announcement, decides which end of the range prints.
61
AI Position
Moderately favorable — AI hits the science, not the revenue unit
Cheap intelligence lowers Alnylam's discovery and trial costs and, more importantly, AI-driven cardiac screening enlarges the diagnosed ATTR pool it already sells into — but the same cheap intelligence arms rival silencers and one-shot editors aiming at its chronic-dosing annuity.
Exposure 47 Confidence 57 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

AI's biggest economic contact point is diagnosis, not drug design: AI-ECG/echo/imaging algorithms are converting undiagnosed cardiac amyloidosis into identified, treatable patients, and Alnylam is the incumbent with an approved ATTR-CM label and treatment-center relationships to absorb that flow at high price per patient-year.

Primary Pressure

AI compresses the cost and time of generating and optimizing oligonucleotide candidates and of designing trials, which erodes the 20-year head start embedded in Alnylam's siRNA/GalNAc know-how and accelerates competing modalities — including one-time gene editing that would replace a recurring q3-month annuity with a single payment.

Critical Hinge

Whether the AI-enlarged diagnosed patient pool grows Alnylam's treated base faster than AI-accelerated competing modalities take share. Observables: new ATTR-CM diagnosis/initiation rates disclosed with Amvuttra volumes versus editing and small-molecule stabilizer Phase 3 readouts.

Hard to Reproduce

GalNAc-conjugate delivery chemistry with more than a decade of human dosing and safety data, approved labels in specific genetic indications, sterile injectable manufacturing at scale, and payer/center-of-excellence relationships in rare disease.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 93
Silencing a pathogenic protein in amyloidosis and hyperoxaluria is a biological need no amount of cheap compute removes.
The need is disease-driven, not information-driven; AI may change how a therapy is found but not whether patients need TTR or oxalate lowering.
ATTR prevalence estimates revised upward · New indication label expansions · Diagnosed-patient growth disclosures
relevance 68 · confidence 86
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 60
RNAi remains a validated route, but AI accelerates rival modalities aiming at the same targets with better dosing convenience.
Alnylam's approach is one of several ways to silence TTR; AI-assisted design and preclinical modeling shorten the path for editing and oral alternatives, putting the delivery method — not the mechanism — at risk.
Gene-editing ATTR Phase 3 durability data · Oral TTR competitor filings · Dosing-interval extension progress
relevance 78 · confidence 52
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 51
Cheap AI both lowers Alnylam's per-program cost and erodes the design expertise that used to be its edge.
Sequence selection, off-target prediction and toxicology triage are exactly the tasks generative models handle; Alnylam gains internally but loses relative advantage as the skill becomes purchasable.
R&D spend per pipeline candidate · Preclinical-to-IND cycle times · AI design partnerships announced
relevance 72 · confidence 52
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 73
Alnylam is paid to carry approval, safety and manufacturing liability that no model can assume.
Physicians and payers buy an FDA-approved, indemnified product with a human safety database; cheap intelligence cannot underwrite that accountability.
Post-marketing safety signals · Label restriction changes · Manufacturing inspection outcomes
relevance 54 · confidence 68
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 58
Candidate ideas get abundant; validated human delivery chemistry, approvals and injectable manufacturing stay scarce.
The scarce layer migrates from 'which gene to silence' to 'proven delivery plus regulatory and payer access at scale' — Alnylam owns the latter but its historic design lead thins.
Third-party GalNAc-style delivery entrants · IP expiry and litigation on conjugates · Capacity and COGS trend vs 82% GM
relevance 76 · confidence 54
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 89
Neither patients nor health systems can internalize drug development or manufacture.
There is no plausible DIY path for a sterile biologic requiring approval; the only substitution risk is another vendor, not self-supply.
Compounding or import workarounds · Hospital-led generic oligo efforts
relevance 26 · confidence 80
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 60
AI clinical decision support sits between diagnosis and prescription — currently routing toward Alnylam's approved indications.
If guideline-embedded AI tools recommend therapy class, the incumbent with label and outcomes data benefits; if those tools favor a cheaper or one-time option, they become a gatekeeper against it.
Guideline algorithms naming therapy sequence · Payer AI prior-auth criteria · Screening tool vendor partnerships
relevance 46 · confidence 48
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 66
A decade-plus of siRNA human PK/PD and safety data is a genuinely non-reproducible training substrate for its own programs.
Alnylam can translate proprietary dosing and knockdown datasets into faster internal candidate selection; the data is deep but narrow to conjugate chemistry, not a broad platform monopoly.
Internal AI translational model claims · Real-world evidence dataset scale · Registry enrollment growth
relevance 58 · confidence 52
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 63
At the profitability inflection, AI-driven cuts in R&D and commercial workload drop straight to the bottom line.
Operating margin just crossed positive (13.5%) on 82% gross margin, so opex leverage is the swing factor; AI-assisted medical affairs, pharmacovigilance and trial ops can hold spend flat while revenue scales.
Opex growth vs revenue growth gap · SG&A per treated patient · Trial cost per enrolled patient
relevance 60 · confidence 54
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 77
The monetized unit is a high-priced treated patient-year — immune to software deflation but vulnerable to a curative substitute.
Cheap intelligence cannot compress the price of an approved rare-disease therapy; only a competing product or a shift to one-time dosing can, and AI shortens that competitor's clock.
Net price per patient trend · Persistence and discontinuation rates · One-time therapy pricing precedents
relevance 82 · confidence 62
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 41
AI plus cheap design lowers the cost of reaching validated genetic targets, thickening the competitive field.
Once a target is human-validated, AI-assisted design shrinks the follow-on cost, so Alnylam's proof-of-concept partly subsidizes rivals; clinical, manufacturing and payer barriers remain the real gate.
Number of competing TTR programs in clinic · Time from IND to Phase 3 industry-wide · Biotech funding into oligo/editing startups
relevance 76 · confidence 54

AI Lens thesis

Alnylam monetizes a treated patient per year, not seats, hours, or information processing, so the deflationary channel that guts software and services barely touches its revenue line; AI reaches it through three narrow doors — (1) cheaper target validation, sequence design and trial operations, which lowers cost per program at exactly the moment the company crosses into operating profit (13.5% OpM on $3.71B, FCF $465M), (2) AI diagnostics that mechanically expand the addressable diagnosed population in ATTR, the single largest driver of the current inflection, and (3) entrant compression, where cheap design tools let competitors reach the same validated genetic targets and let editing platforms iterate faster toward a curative one-shot product that would destroy chronic-dosing economics; the net is favorable because the scarce assets AI cannot copy — approvals, delivery chemistry validated in humans, manufacturing, payer access — sit above the layer AI commoditizes.

Thesis breaker A Phase 3 gene-editing readout in ATTR showing durable single-dose knockdown with clean safety, or payer policy steering newly diagnosed patients to a one-time therapy, would invert the read. Conversely, disclosed acceleration in AI-screened ATTR-CM diagnoses would push toward the bull end.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside AI screening of existing echo/ECG archives is a demand-side, zero-marketing-cost patient-finding engine for an already-approved product — the rare case where cheap intelligence directly expands units sold rather than deflating price.

Downside Alnylam's revenue is an annuity on chronic silencing; AI most accelerates the modality class (editing, durable stabilizers) whose value proposition is ending the annuity, and payers will underwrite that switch enthusiastically at rare-disease price points.

Outcome range spread 41

37Bear case
60Central case
78Bull 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 16:30

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.

Growing The Amvuttra ATTR-CM label expansion converted Alnylam from a rare-disease niche player into a cardiology-scale franchise, and the launch ramp plus newly-positive operating leverage should sustain strong double-digit growth well past the next year — though the ~65% YoY print is a launch-inflection peak, not a run-rate. conf 8/10
Share gain Category growing · Biotechnology is in expansion phase with ~17.9% category median recent growth and 15.4% industry revenue CAGR; Alnylam's 65.2% recent YoY runs roughly 50pp ahead of it. Within the narrower ATTR sub-category, the category is expanding faster still as diagnosis rates climb, and Alnylam is gaining share of a growing pool rather than defending a fixed one.
Next 2 quarters
Growing
The ATTR-CM launch is still in its steep phase with new-patient starts and geographic label rollouts adding sequentially; the revenue line has very high visibility over two quarters. Earnings, by contrast, will be dictated by collaboration-revenue timing and R&D phasing rather than the franchise.
≈ inline with expectations
Year 1
Growing
A full year of the expanded label against a partial-year comparator, plus ex-US launches sequencing in, keeps full-year revenue growth strongly positive even as the YoY rate decays from the mid-60s. Fixed commercial base means the earnings line grows faster than revenue.
↑ above expectations
Years 2–3
Growing
Structural earnings power clearly rises — the ATTR franchise is durable, dosing convenience is defensible, and next-generation TTR silencing protects the base. But three consecutive years of near-60% compounding requires the cardiology penetration curve to stay steep against tafamidis and acoramidis, and requires the unproven cardiometabolic programs to arrive on time. Base case is strong but decelerating growth, not sustained hyper-growth.
↓ 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
84 ATTR-CM indication unlocks a 10x larger addressable population — Vutrisiran's move from hATTR polyneuropathy (a few thousand patients) into transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy expands the treatable base by roughly an order of magnitude. This is a label-driven TAM step-change, not a share-of-voice fight: diagnosis rates for ATTR-CM are still rising as cardiologists adopt imaging/genetic workup, so the addressable pool itself is growing alongside penetration. Quarterly subcutaneous dosing is a credible differentiator against daily oral stabilizers for adherence-sensitive cardiology patients.
68 Operating leverage inflecting as a commercial infrastructure already built gets more revenue — The salesforce, manufacturing and rare-disease reimbursement machinery were paid for during the ONPATTRO/GIVLAARI/OXLUMO years. Incremental ATTR-CM revenue flows onto a largely fixed commercial base, which is why earnings just crossed into positive territory and why EPS growth should out-run revenue growth for several years. Industry-wide margin expansion (+4.5pp operating, +6.1pp net over 3 years) reinforces the direction.
61 Measured share gain versus an expanding category — Recent revenue YoY of 65.2% against industry 15.6% is a ~50pp gap, with 42.5% multi-year revenue CAGR, all-positive years, and a 'growing' quarterly trend at moderate volatility. This is a company taking share inside a category that is itself in expansion phase — the most favorable of the four category shapes.
36 Follow-on pipeline extends the same silencing mechanism — Next-generation TTR silencing with far less frequent dosing, plus partnered cardiometabolic programs (hypertension, CNS), give Alnylam a way to defend and extend the ATTR franchise it is building rather than face a cliff. Cannibalizing yourself with a better dosing schedule is a much stronger position than being cannibalized.
Growth risks
65 Crowded ATTR field compresses the ramp's slope — Tafamidis is entrenched with cardiologists, acoramidis is an oral stabilizer launching hard into the same clinics, and a competing antisense TTR silencer is on market. Silencers have the mechanistic argument, but formulary access, oral convenience and prescriber inertia mean penetration curves flatten earlier than launch-year math implies. This is the single biggest determinant of the years-2-3 number.
64 Arithmetic deceleration off a rising base — 65% YoY is the signature of a first-full-year label expansion. As ATTR-CM revenue becomes the majority of the base, the same absolute dollar adds print as 30-40% then 20-something percent. Direction stays positive; the rate almost certainly steps down, which matters enormously against a price-implied bar of 60%.
45 Lumpy, low-quality earnings line — The estimate record is violently mixed (+66%, -17%, +35%, near-breakeven, -14%), reflecting collaboration/milestone revenue timing and discretionary R&D phasing on a thin profit base. EPS is a poor near-term signal here, and quarter-to-quarter beats/misses are close to coin-flips regardless of the underlying franchise trajectory.
30 Rare-disease pricing and payer scrutiny at cardiology volumes — Rare-disease-style pricing applied to a population 10x larger invites gross-to-net pressure, prior-authorization friction and eventual government price negotiation exposure. Volume growth may increasingly outpace revenue growth.
30 Pipeline beyond TTR remains unproven at scale — The cardiometabolic pivot (hypertension, lipids, CNS) is the source of most of the long-duration value in the story but has yet to deliver an approved large-market product. If TTR is the only franchise, the structural growth window is finite.
The world is moving toward earlier, imaging-and-genetics-based diagnosis of infiltrative cardiomyopathy, which mechanically enlarges Alnylam's market every year independent of its own commercial execution. RNAi has moved past platform-risk into execution-risk: the question is no longer whether gene silencing works in humans but how much of a cardiology market a quarterly injectable can hold against oral stabilizers. Macro headwinds (10y at 4.63) matter to how such duration is discounted but barely touch prescription volumes for a symptomatic, mortality-reducing therapy. Broader drug-pricing policy is the real world-level risk: a rare-disease price point stretched across a cardiology-sized population is exactly the profile policymakers target.
Growth position composite +19
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
70Next 2 quarters · Growing
70Year 1 · Growing
70Years 2–3 · Growing
+19Composite (−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 11:19:17
Verdict Modestly undervalued at $228 — quarterly trajectory (rev $500M→$1.29B in 7 quarters, margins swinging positive) supports fair value $250-270; ATTR-CM uptake and BridgeBio competitive dynamics are the swing factors over the next 4 quarters.

The raw trajectory here is genuinely impressive and I want to lead with it before getting to the caveats: quarterly revenue went from $500.9M (Q3 2024) to $773.7M (Q2 2025) to $1.25B (Q3 2025) to $1.10B (Q4 2025) to $1.29B (Q2 2026). That's not linear growth — that's a step-change, consistent with Amvuttra's ATTR-CM label expansion (approved March 2025) hitting the P&L. The 65% YoY revenue growth and the swing from -$111.6M net income (Q3 2024) to +$251.1M (Q3 2025) and +$164.5M (Q2 2026) is a legitimate profitability inflection, not accounting cosmetics. Annual FCF at $465M on $3.71B revenue is real cash. So the "high-growth profitable" archetype is correct, and the pre-flight "pre-profit-platform" label is stale — Alnylam is profitable now, at scale, on a franchise that just doubled its addressable population.

Where I diverge from the synthesis is the "fully_priced / composite $178" verdict. On my back-of-envelope: run-rating Q2 2026 revenue of $1.29B gives ~$5.2B, and if ATTR-CM penetration is early (it is — vutrisiran's ATTR-CM launch is <18 months old against a ~150K US patient pool competing with tafamidis), $7-8B revenue in 2027-28 is plausible without pipeline heroics. At 20% net margins that's $1.4-1.6B of earnings, putting forward P/E at 19-22x on a platform still growing 30%+. That does not look "fully priced" — it looks reasonable for a de-risked biotech with a validated modality. The synthesis's $178 fair value implicitly assumes revenue growth decelerates fast; I don't see the evidence for that in the quarterly cadence. The signal-adjusted $240 is closer to my read.

The contrarian case worth taking seriously isn't the tired "RNAi has disappointed for 15 years" narrative — that's a bear story from 2018, not 2026, and the ATTR franchise settles it. The real contrarian argument is competitive: BridgeBio's acoramidis (Attruby) launched late 2024 with a differentiated stabilizer mechanism and is taking share in ATTR-CM; Ionis's eplontersen is a direct RNAi/ASO competitor in ATTR-PN; and the cardiometabolic pipeline (zilebesiran for hypertension) faces a wall of GLP-1s and cheap generics. If ATTR-CM share caps at 30-35% instead of the 50%+ implicit in bull models, revenue tops out closer to $5.5B and the 98x trailing P/E starts to bite. The other real risk: the Q2 2026 margin (12.7%) is *lower* than Q3 2025 (20.1%) and Q4 2025 (14%). That's not a trend yet, but it's worth watching — SG&A ramp for cardiometabolic trials could compress margins meaningfully before pipeline revenue arrives.

Data quality caveats: the "2026-03-31: rev —" line is a hole in the file that matters; without Q1 2026 I can't tell if the Q2 sequential looks like acceleration or catch-up. The P/B of 39 is a non-signal for a biotech (intangibles-driven), correctly flagged. Insider activity is neutral-to-slightly-negative (small sales after option exercises, standard comp behavior — not a signal). The "Poor Cash Flow Quality" flag contradicts the reported $465M FCF and $524M OCF and I'd discount it — the flag is probably triggered by the recent transition from losses, not underlying accrual games. Where I partially agree with synthesis: valuation IS fragile in the sense that a Phase 3 miss on zilebesiran or ALN-KHK, or a competitive setback in ATTR, would compress the multiple hard. This is not a "back up the truck" name at $228 — it's a name where the fundamentals are catching up to the multiple and where the next 4-6 quarters of ATTR-CM uptake data are the whole ballgame.

Net: I dissent from "fully_priced." The quarterly acceleration is more powerful than the composite DCF captures, and the pre-flight/synthesis framing underweights that Q3-Q4 2025 already proved the profitability model. Fair value is closer to $250-270 on my numbers, with meaningful downside to $170 if ATTR-CM disappoints. Starter position defensible; not table-pounding because competitive dynamics in ATTR are genuinely fluid and the pipeline optionality is not free.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-15 11:19:33
Verdict Fairly valued to slightly overvalued at $229 — the commercial inflection is real, but I’d want a pullback toward $190 or a few more quarters of $1.1B+ revenue with mid-teens margins before getting constructive.

What jumps out is not the RNAi story but the speed of the financial turn. Alnylam went from $2.25B of revenue and a $278M net loss in 2024 to $3.71B of revenue and $314M of net income in 2025, a 65% top-line jump with operating margin swinging from -7.9% to +13.5%. That is a real inflection, not accounting noise alone, because operating cash flow also moved positive to $524M and free cash flow to $465M. Quarterly data show the same break: revenue ran roughly $500M-$770M through 2024 and 1H25, then stepped up to $1.25B in 3Q25, $1.10B in 4Q25, and $1.29B in 2Q26, with net margins now consistently positive in the low-teens to 20% range after years of red ink. A biotech that has actually crossed from platform promise into self-funded commercial execution deserves a premium multiple.

But the stock already has one. At a $30.6B market cap, investors are paying about 8.2x trailing sales, nearly 98x trailing earnings, and over 50x EV/EBITDA for a company whose latest full-year net margin is still only 8.5%. Even if I annualize the strongest recent revenue run-rate using the visible quarters, the business may now be capable of something like $4.8B-$5.0B in revenue, which brings the sales multiple down somewhat, but it does not make the earnings multiple comfortable unless margins keep expanding materially. This is the central issue: the income statement has improved dramatically, but valuation assumes that 2025 was not a one-off step-up and that 2026-2028 will convert much more of each incremental dollar into profit. That can happen in orphan biotech once the cost base is leveraged, yet the current price leaves limited room for any wobble in launch trajectory, pricing, or pipeline timing.

I also do not buy the most bearish framing that cash flow quality is poor. The provided data show the opposite directionally: free cash flow of $465M against net income of $314M in 2025 is healthy, not suspect, and cash of $1.66B with no debt listed gives Alnylam unusual strategic flexibility for biotech. The ugly 39x P/B is a balance-sheet artifact of only $789M of equity, not a useful sign of excess by itself. Where I am cautious is that profitability is still young and probably lumpy. The quarter ending 2025-06-30 still lost $72M on $774M of revenue before the step-change in the back half, and biotech revenue can be distorted by milestone, collaboration, or stocking dynamics. So while the business is clearly better than the old “pre-profit platform” label, I think the market has jumped quickly from proving viability to pricing durable large-cap biopharma economics.

The strongest pushback to my skepticism is straightforward: if 2025 was the first full year of scale and 2026 is simply the first normalized year of earnings power, trailing PE is almost irrelevant. A company growing revenue 40%+ over several years, holding gross margin above 80%, and now dropping hundreds of millions into operating and free cash flow can look optically expensive right before margins inflect hard. If the current quarterly run-rate near $1.1B-$1.3B is sustainable, annual revenue could exceed $5B sooner than the market once expected, and a move from 8.5% net margin to 20%+ would make today’s valuation far less demanding. On that bull case, $30B for the category leader in a validated modality with no balance-sheet stress is not crazy at all. I weigh that argument less heavily because the stock is being underwritten on future mix, penetration, and pipeline execution that the disclosed numbers alone do not yet prove.

What would change my mind is surprisingly specific. If the next two reported quarters show revenue holding above $1.1B each without a large collapse in net margin—say, sustained 15%+ net margins and operating cash flow continuing to outrun earnings—then I would be more willing to value Alnylam on forward earnings power rather than trailing optics, and $230 would look reasonable to cheap. Conversely, if revenue slips back toward the $700M-$900M zone or margins retreat to breakeven, then the 2025-2026 surge will look more episodic than structural and the multiple should compress sharply. For now I see a genuinely transformed company, but one whose transformation is already substantially capitalized in the stock.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-15 11:20:24
Verdict Fairly valued near $229–240; execution real but 98x trailing earnings leaves little cushion for pipeline slips

Alnylam’s numbers describe a genuine commercial inflection, not a narrative overlay. Revenue scaled from $844M in 2021 to $2.25B in 2024 to $3.71B in 2025—a 65% year-over-year jump and a 42.5% multi-year CAGR—while the P&L flipped from an operating loss of $177M and net loss of $278M in 2024 to operating income of $502M and net income of $314M in 2025. Free cash flow of $465M against only $59M of capex is the cleaner signal: cash conversion already exceeds reported earnings, which directly contradicts the “poor cash flow quality” flag in the secondary models. Quarterly run-rate has stabilized in the $1.1–1.3B band (Q3 2025 $1.25B, Q4 $1.10B, Q2 2026 $1.29B), implying a mid-$5B annualized pace if growth simply holds, not accelerates. Gross margin of 82% and a debt-free balance sheet with $1.66B cash give real operating leverage; the 98x trailing P/E and 8.3x sales multiple are being earned against a franchise that only just crossed the profitability threshold, not against a mature earner. Book value of $789M and the 39x P/B are artifacts of accumulated losses and intangibles—they are not useful anchors.

The story the raw data tell is platform validation with commercial proof, not pure optionality. Operating margin expanded from deeply negative to 13.5% in a single year; ROE printed 40% on the thin equity base. That is the math of a rare-disease commercial engine (ATTR and adjacent labels) still early in penetration, not of a pre-revenue science project. At $30.6B enterprise value on $3.71B sales and ~$465M FCF, the market is paying roughly 66x current free cash flow and 7.6x EV/revenue—expensive in absolute terms, but consistent with a high-teens-to-mid-twenties forward multiple if revenue compounds into the $5–7B zone and margins keep climbing toward 20%+. The signal-adjusted fair value near $241 versus $229 is directionally right: the stock is not in bubble territory relative to the growth already delivered.

The strongest case against this read is that almost nothing in the multiple is paid for by today’s earnings power alone. A 98x P/E, 51x EV/EBITDA, and an implied need for something like $10B-plus long-term revenue scale mean the stock is a pipeline and label-expansion vehicle dressed in commercial clothes. The thesis evaluation’s slight bear tilt (−6) is fair on that point: competitive RNAi, antisense, CRISPR, and cardiometabolic incumbents can compress both pricing and share, and one or two Phase 3 misses would collapse the duration the multiple requires. ROIC still prints negative (−56%), which—even if partly a lagged capital base—reminds you that cumulative economic profit has not yet been earned. Valuation synthesis correctly flags fragility: few downside scenarios support $229 if growth decelerates toward 20% or margins stall in the low teens. Insider flow is noise (option exercises and related sales), not confirmation.

I would flip to decisively bearish on a clear competitive share loss in the ATTR franchise, a material Phase 3 failure in a larger-indication program, or two consecutive quarters of sub-20% revenue growth with operating margin compression. I would flip more bullish on sustained quarterly revenue above $1.4B with operating margins pushing through 20%, or a clean late-stage win that de-risks a multi-billion cardiometabolic label and forces consensus toward $6B-plus revenue inside three years.

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 6.0; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 8.0
undervalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +2.0 vs panel · self: 6.0
GPT gpt-5.4 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -1.0 vs panel · self: 4.0
Grok grok-4.5 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -1.0 vs panel · self: 5.0
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 11:28:00
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality — wait for a dip near $180 7/10
Real business inflection but priced for it — fair value here, not a buy until the tape gives it back or the pipeline delivers.
The cruxWhether the cardiometabolic expansion (and continued ATTR uptake) meaningfully beats a bar that at ~8x revenue and ~65x FCF is already embedded in the price.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from ALNY's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionModerate Dilution
Earnings QualityGood Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+32
Solid
edge √Σ 118 · risk √Σ 85 · conf 7/10

Revenue scaled from $844M (2021) to $3.71B (2025), a ~4.4x lift in four years with gross margins holding in the low-to-mid 80s. Operating margin inflected from -83.9% to +13.5% and net income turned positive at $313.7M in 2025 after cumulative losses exceeding $2.7B in 2021-2024. FCF flipped to a solid $465.4M, meaning the company now self-funds without recourse to capital markets. Altman Z of 4.21 puts it in the safe zone and net cash of $1.66B provides real, if not enormous, cushion (5.4% of market cap).

Strengths 3
m78
Revenue scaling with margin inflection
Revenue grew from $844M to $3.71B (2021-2025) while operating margin swung from -83.9% to +13.5% — genuine operating leverage on an 82-86% gross margin base.
m70
Self-funding achieved
FCF of $465M in 2025 versus cumulative FCF burn of $1.33B in 2021-2024. Now covers its own R&D without external capital.
m55
Balance sheet solid
$1.66B liquid cash, no net debt, Altman Z 4.21. Enough runway even if 2025 profitability proves lumpy.
Concerns 4
m55
Persistent share count growth
Diluted shares from 118.5M to 134.7M (~3.3% CAGR); SBC at 9.4% of revenue is elevated. Per-share value creation lags enterprise-level growth.
m45
OCF/NI of 0.54x flagged
Cash trails reported net income in the first profitable year; accruals -9.5% of assets. First-year profitability figures deserve a second look before treating the run-rate as clean.
m35
Insider tape one-directional
39 sales / 0 open-market buys over 12 months ($4.9M sold). Not alarming in size but no insider is stepping up with conviction post-inflection.
m30
Gross margin drift
GM stepped down from 86.4% (2024) to 81.8% (2025) — worth watching whether mix shift or pricing pressure is behind a ~460bp compression in the year of scaling.
This is a real business now, not a perpetual clinical-stage cash burner. The 2025 print - $3.7B revenue, +13.5% op margin, $465M FCF, first GAAP profit - is a legitimate inflection, not an accounting trick (accruals are actually negative). But I'm not ready to call it fortress. One year of profit, cash conversion at 0.54x, steady ~3% dilution, no insider buying, and a gross margin that just gave back ~460bps all say 'prove it for another year or two.' Solid, improving, still earning its stripes.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • Composition of 2025 revenue jump — is Amvuttra/TTR expansion the driver and how concentrated is it by product/geography?
  • Whether OCF/NI 0.54x reflects working capital build (receivables from launch) or lower-quality accruals
  • Sustainability of the ~82% GM level versus 86% historical - mix or pricing?
  • Royalty/collaboration revenue vs product revenue split and durability
  • Detail on SBC grant policy and whether buybacks are contemplated now that FCF is positive
  • Pipeline read-through beyond ATTR franchise (competitive threat from BridgeBio, Ionis, Pfizer)
Valuation / Mispricing
-48
Fairly Valued
edge √Σ 39 · risk √Σ 91 · conf 6/10
price $228.65 vs deserved ~$220-240, roughly 0-5% gap - essentially fair value. attractive below $180.00

The composite fair value of $178 implies ~22% downside, while the signal-adjusted FV of $241 implies ~5% upside - bracketing today's $228.65 price. The methods disagree wildly: DCF says $134, EPV floor says $14 (essentially zero steady-state earnings power - a runaway floor reflecting that GAAP profits just turned positive in 2025), and anchored P/E says $295. The EPV number should be largely ignored; it captures the fact that trailing earnings are tiny, not that the business is worth nothing. Stripping that out, the honest range is roughly $134 (DCF) to $295 (peer multiple), centering near the current quote. What is priced in: continued rare-disease franchise growth plus a credible option on the cardiometabolic pivot. That is not heroic, but it is not discounted either - the market already gives Alnylam credit for the 2025 inflection ($3.7B revenue, 13.5% op margin, $465M FCF). To justify meaningful upside from here you need the cardiometabolic expansion to hit, not just the base to compound. Quality is solid (score 32) but with ~3% annual dilution and only one year of GAAP profit, I am not willing to pay a fortress multiple. Net: fair, not cheap.

Cheap signals 2
m30
Anchored P/E suggests $295
Peer-multiple method points to ~29% upside, reflecting that if ALNY sustains the profitability inflection it screens cheap versus profitable biotech comps.
m25
Clean earnings quality
Earnings-quality signal is good (negative accruals, real FCF) - no haircut needed to the deserved value, unlike many just-turned-profitable biotechs.
Rich / priced-in 4
m55
Composite FV below price
Composite fair value $178 vs price $228.65 implies ~22% downside if you weight DCF and EPV meaningfully. The signal adjustment to $241 is what pulls it to parity.
m50
Priced for the cardiometabolic option
At ~8x revenue and ~65x FCF ($30.6B cap vs $465M FCF), the market is already paying for pipeline expansion beyond rare disease - the bull case is embedded, not free.
m35
~3% annual dilution erodes per-share value
Steady share creep plus no insider buying means per-share fair value grows slower than enterprise value - a quiet headwind to the deserved multiple.
m40
EPV floor is a runaway - ignore but note fragility
$14 EPV highlights that steady-state earnings power is still thin; one year of GAAP profit does not yet support a durable multiple.
Fair, not cheap. The methods bracket the price and the signal-adjusted FV of $241 sits right on top of $228.65 - that is the definition of no edge. I like the business inflection but the market already knows about it, and the cardiometabolic optionality is priced in rather than given away. I would want this closer to $180 (~20% below here, near the composite FV and below DCF) before I would call it a valuation buy. Above $250 it starts looking rich unless the pipeline delivers.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • 2026 revenue guidance and mix between rare-disease franchises and cardiometabolic programs
  • Operating margin trajectory - is 13.5% a floor or a peak tied to a specific product cycle
  • Share count guidance and SBC as % of revenue
  • Any Phase 3 readouts in cardiometabolic that could re-rate the deserved multiple
General Sentiment
-45
Headwind
tail √Σ 42 · head √Σ 90 · conf 6/10

The macro tape is mildly risk-on with VIX at 14 and indices near highs, but with a 0.28 beta ALNY barely participates in that lift. What actually moves this name is the platform narrative and single-catalyst news flow, and both currently lean negative. The July 30 -28% air pocket on a guidance cut and worries about Amvuttra second-line demand normalizing is the dominant recent sentiment event and still colors positioning. Even with strong 3-year momentum (42% CAGR, +65% trailing), a single-day 28% drawdown resets the tape psychology and puts every subsequent print under a suspicious lens. The platform-monopoly narrative has only moderate intensity and moderate durability with a medium cult - not the kind of true-believer base that absorbs a guide-down without flinching. The cardiometabolic pivot is the bull case buyers need, but competing modalities (GLP-1, CRISPR, antisense) are eating oxygen in the story wars, and 15 years of 'next big thing' fatigue caps how much narrative premium the tape will re-extend before a clean Phase 3 win.

Tailwinds 2
m30
Risk-on tape and low beta
Calm VIX and risk-on regime are a mild positive backdrop, but a 0.28 beta means the market tailwind barely reaches this name - a floor, not a lift.
m30
Strong multi-year momentum base
42% CAGR and +32pp over 3 years means the trend crowd hasn't abandoned it; the July gap is being tested, not confirmed as a top.
Headwinds 3
m70
Guidance-cut scar still fresh
The July 30 -28% drop on a full-year guide reduction and Amvuttra demand-normalization worries is recent enough to anchor positioning; sellers on strength, buyers demanding proof.
m45
Platform narrative losing oxygen to rival modalities
RNAi is competing for the same cardiometabolic story real estate as GLP-1s and CRISPR, both with louder tapes; moderate durability and medium cult mean limited narrative cushion.
m35
High rates on a long-duration biotech
10y at 4.63% is a persistent low-grade drag on story-stocks whose value sits in out-year cardiometabolic optionality, even for names with real revenue.
Net pressure leans negative but not extreme. The tape itself is friendly, but a 0.28 beta means the risk-on lift barely lands here; meanwhile a fresh guide-down and demand-normalization worry are actively pressing, and the RNAi platform story lacks the cult intensity to shrug it off. I read this as a real headwind on sentiment - not a collapse, just a name that has to earn its bounce with a clean catalyst rather than ride the tape.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Next Amvuttra quarterly script trend - stabilization would break the demand-normalization bear framing
  • Any Phase 3 readout in cardiometabolic that would re-arm the platform narrative
  • Analyst target revisions post the July guide-down - stabilizing or still cutting
  • Whether the stock reclaims the pre-gap level or the July high acts as resistance
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
+30
Moderately favorable — AI hits the science, not the revenue unit
opp √Σ 85 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 6/10

Alnylam monetizes a treated patient per year, not seats, hours, or information processing, so the deflationary channel that guts software and services barely touches its revenue line; AI reaches it through three narrow doors — (1) cheaper target validation, sequence design and trial operations, which lowers cost per program at exactly the moment the company crosses into operating profit (13.5% OpM on $3.71B, FCF $465M), (2) AI diagnostics that mechanically expand the addressable diagnosed population in ATTR, the single largest driver of the current inflection, and (3) entrant compression, where cheap design tools let competitors reach the same validated genetic targets and let editing platforms iterate faster toward a curative one-shot product that would destroy chronic-dosing economics; the net is favorable because the scarce assets AI cannot copy — approvals, delivery chemistry validated in humans, manufacturing, payer access — sit above the layer AI commoditizes.

AI opportunities 8
m58
Underlying Need Persistence
Silencing a pathogenic protein in amyloidosis and hyperoxaluria is a biological need no amount of cheap compute removes.
m16
Solution Persistence
RNAi remains a validated route, but AI accelerates rival modalities aiming at the same targets with better dosing convenience.
m25
Responsibility Transfer
Alnylam is paid to carry approval, safety and manufacturing liability that no model can assume.
m20
Customer DIY Preference
Neither patients nor health systems can internalize drug development or manufacture.
m9
AI Intermediation Position
AI clinical decision support sits between diagnosis and prescription — currently routing toward Alnylam's approved indications.
m19
Data Leverage
A decade-plus of siRNA human PK/PD and safety data is a genuinely non-reproducible training substrate for its own programs.
m16
AI Margin Conversion
At the profitability inflection, AI-driven cuts in R&D and commercial workload drop straight to the bottom line.
m44
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit is a high-priced treated patient-year — immune to software deflation but vulnerable to a curative substitute.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

Alnylam is the rare biotech where AI shows up as more diagnosed customers rather than cheaper substitutes — but the annuity is only safe until an AI-accelerated one-shot cure reads out. Position 61 with a 37-78 spread: the revenue unit (high-priced treated patient-year) is structurally deflation-proof, and AI cardiac screening is quietly expanding the ATTR pool into an already-approved label just as operating margin flipped positive (13.5% on 82% GM) — that combination converts AI directly into units and profit. The kill switch is entrant_compression at 41: cheap design plus Alnylam's own target validation shortens rivals' path, and editing platforms monetize by ending chronic dosing. Watch disclosed new ATTR-CM diagnosis/initiation rates against competing Phase 3 durability data — that race, not any AI product announcement, decides which end of the range prints.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Net price per patient trend
  • Persistence and discontinuation rates
  • One-time therapy pricing precedents
  • Gene-editing ATTR Phase 3 durability data
  • Oral TTR competitor filings
  • Dosing-interval extension progress
  • Third-party GalNAc-style delivery entrants
  • IP expiry and litigation on conjugates
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
+19
Growing
edge √Σ 129 · risk √Σ 110 · conf 8/10

The world is moving toward earlier, imaging-and-genetics-based diagnosis of infiltrative cardiomyopathy, which mechanically enlarges Alnylam's market every year independent of its own commercial execution. RNAi has moved past platform-risk into execution-risk: the question is no longer whether gene silencing works in humans but how much of a cardiology market a quarterly injectable can hold against oral stabilizers. Macro headwinds (10y at 4.63) matter to how such duration is discounted but barely touch prescription volumes for a symptomatic, mortality-reducing therapy. Broader drug-pricing policy is the real world-level risk: a rare-disease price point stretched across a cardiology-sized population is exactly the profile policymakers target.

Growth drivers 4
m84
ATTR-CM indication unlocks a 10x larger addressable population
Vutrisiran's move from hATTR polyneuropathy (a few thousand patients) into transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy expands the treatable base by roughly an order of magnitude. This is a label-driven TAM step-change, not a share-of-voice fight: diagnosis rates for ATTR-CM are still rising as cardiologists adopt imaging/genetic workup, so the addressable pool itself is growing alongside penetration. Quarterly subcutaneous dosing is a credible differentiator against daily oral stabilizers for adherence-sensitive cardiology patients.
m68
Operating leverage inflecting as a commercial infrastructure already built gets more revenue
The salesforce, manufacturing and rare-disease reimbursement machinery were paid for during the ONPATTRO/GIVLAARI/OXLUMO years. Incremental ATTR-CM revenue flows onto a largely fixed commercial base, which is why earnings just crossed into positive territory and why EPS growth should out-run revenue growth for several years. Industry-wide margin expansion (+4.5pp operating, +6.1pp net over 3 years) reinforces the direction.
m61
Measured share gain versus an expanding category
Recent revenue YoY of 65.2% against industry 15.6% is a ~50pp gap, with 42.5% multi-year revenue CAGR, all-positive years, and a 'growing' quarterly trend at moderate volatility. This is a company taking share inside a category that is itself in expansion phase — the most favorable of the four category shapes.
m36
Follow-on pipeline extends the same silencing mechanism
Next-generation TTR silencing with far less frequent dosing, plus partnered cardiometabolic programs (hypertension, CNS), give Alnylam a way to defend and extend the ATTR franchise it is building rather than face a cliff. Cannibalizing yourself with a better dosing schedule is a much stronger position than being cannibalized.
Growth risks 5
m65
Crowded ATTR field compresses the ramp's slope
Tafamidis is entrenched with cardiologists, acoramidis is an oral stabilizer launching hard into the same clinics, and a competing antisense TTR silencer is on market. Silencers have the mechanistic argument, but formulary access, oral convenience and prescriber inertia mean penetration curves flatten earlier than launch-year math implies. This is the single biggest determinant of the years-2-3 number.
m64
Arithmetic deceleration off a rising base
65% YoY is the signature of a first-full-year label expansion. As ATTR-CM revenue becomes the majority of the base, the same absolute dollar adds print as 30-40% then 20-something percent. Direction stays positive; the rate almost certainly steps down, which matters enormously against a price-implied bar of 60%.
m45
Lumpy, low-quality earnings line
The estimate record is violently mixed (+66%, -17%, +35%, near-breakeven, -14%), reflecting collaboration/milestone revenue timing and discretionary R&D phasing on a thin profit base. EPS is a poor near-term signal here, and quarter-to-quarter beats/misses are close to coin-flips regardless of the underlying franchise trajectory.
m30
Rare-disease pricing and payer scrutiny at cardiology volumes
Rare-disease-style pricing applied to a population 10x larger invites gross-to-net pressure, prior-authorization friction and eventual government price negotiation exposure. Volume growth may increasingly outpace revenue growth.
m30
Pipeline beyond TTR remains unproven at scale
The cardiometabolic pivot (hypertension, lipids, CNS) is the source of most of the long-duration value in the story but has yet to deliver an approved large-market product. If TTR is the only franchise, the structural growth window is finite.
vs expectations: ~6m inline · 1y above · 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 ALNY — the prediction needs its fair-value anchors.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for ALNY. 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