For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Gilead Sciences Inc. (GILD) — 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 +14 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 46 · Value -13 · Sentiment -4 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $120.25 vs $135.25 at analysis
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 capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-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.
Gilead Sciences Inc.
GILD NASDAQGilead Sciences Inc. is a global biopharmaceutical company focused on discovering, developing, and commercializing innovative medicines for serious and life-threatening diseases. The company’s core franchise centers on therapies for HIV and viral hepatitis, including hepatitis B and C, where its antiviral portfolio remains widely used in clinical practice. Beyond infectious diseases, Gilead Sciences has expanded meaningfully into oncology, offering cell therapies such as CAR-T treatments for certain blood cancers and antibody-drug conjugates used in breast and bladder cancer care. It also maintains programs in liver diseases, inflammatory conditions, and respiratory disorders, aiming to address areas of high unmet medical need. Headquartered in Foster City, California, and founded in 1987, Gilead Sciences plays a significant role in the healthcare sector by supplying advanced therapeutics to hospitals, clinics, and healthcare systems worldwide, often in collaboration with research institutions and commercial partners.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 6.78
Total Equity: $22.62B
Shares: 1,255,000,000
Total Debt: $24.94B
Cash: $7.56B
EBITDA: $10.39B
Total Debt: $24.94B
Cash: $7.56B
Revenue: $29.44B
Revenue: $29.44B
Revenue: $29.44B
Total Equity: $22.62B
Tax Rate: 13.1%
Equity: $22.62B
Total Debt: $24.94B
Cash: $7.56B
Current Liabilities: $11.81B
Long-Term Debt: $22.13B
Total Debt: $24.94B
Total Equity: $22.62B
Shares: 1,255,000,000
Shares: 1,255,000,000
CapEx: -$563.00M
Shares: 1,255,000,000
Stock Price: $135.25
Net Income: $8.51B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 1, 2026 5:01pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $27.3B | $27.3B | $27.1B | $28.8B | $29.4B |
| Cost of Revenue | $6.6B | $5.7B | $6.5B | $6.3B | $6.2B |
| Gross Profit | $20.7B | $21.6B | $20.6B | $22.5B | $23.2B |
| Operating Expenses | $10.8B | $14.3B | $13.0B | $20.8B | $13.2B |
| Operating Income | $9.9B | $7.3B | $7.6B | $1.7B | $10.0B |
| Net Income | $6.2B | $4.6B | $5.7B | $480.0M | $8.5B |
| EBITDA | $10.2B | $7.7B | $8.0B | $2.0B | $10.4B |
| EPS | $4.96 | $3.66 | $4.54 | $0.38 | $6.84 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $4.93 | $3.64 | $4.50 | $0.38 | $6.78 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 1, 2026 12:03am (22d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $5.3B | $5.4B | $6.1B | $10.0B | $7.6B |
| Total Current Assets | $14.8B | $14.4B | $16.1B | $19.2B | $18.3B |
| Total Assets | $68.0B | $63.2B | $62.1B | $59.0B | $59.0B |
| Current Liabilities | $11.6B | $11.2B | $11.3B | $12.0B | $11.8B |
| Long-Term Debt | $25.2B | $23.0B | $23.2B | $24.9B | $22.1B |
| Total Liabilities | $46.9B | $42.0B | $39.4B | $39.7B | $36.4B |
| Total Equity | $21.1B | $21.2B | $22.7B | $19.2B | $22.6B |
| Retained Earnings | $16.3B | $15.7B | $16.3B | $11.5B | $13.7B |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 1, 2026 5:01pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $11.4B | $9.1B | $8.0B | $10.8B | $10.0B |
| Capital Expenditure | -$579.0M | -$728.0M | -$585.0M | -$523.0M | -$563.0M |
| Free Cash Flow | $10.8B | $8.3B | $7.4B | $10.3B | $9.5B |
| Acquisitions (net) | -$1.4B | -$1.8B | -$1.2B | -$4.8B | -$1.1B |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | -$4.8B | $0 | — | — | — |
| Dividends Paid | -$3.6B | -$3.7B | -$3.8B | -$3.9B | -$4.0B |
| Stock Buybacks | -$546.0M | -$1.4B | -$1.0B | -$1.2B | -$1.9B |
| Net Change in Cash | -$659.0M | $74.0M | $673.0M | $3.9B | -$2.4B |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 1, 2026 5:01pm (22d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -0.1% | -0.6% | +6.0% | +2.4% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +4.4% | -4.7% | +9.1% | +3.1% |
| Operating Income Growth | -26.1% | +3.8% | -78.1% | +503.0% |
| Net Income Growth | -26.2% | +23.4% | -91.5% | +1,672.9% |
| EBITDA Growth | -25.3% | +4.0% | -74.3% | +408.7% |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 1, 2026 12:03am (22d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-15 | $0.82 | — | — | — |
| 2026-03-13 | $0.82 | — | — | — |
| 2025-12-15 | $0.79 | — | — | — |
| 2025-09-15 | $0.79 | — | — | — |
| 2025-06-13 | $0.79 | — | — | — |
| 2025-03-14 | $0.79 | — | — | — |
| 2024-12-13 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2024-09-13 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2024-06-14 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2024-03-14 | $0.77 | — | — | — |
| 2023-12-14 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
| 2023-09-14 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
| 2023-06-14 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
| 2023-03-14 | $0.75 | — | — | — |
| 2022-12-14 | $0.73 | — | — | — |
| 2022-09-14 | $0.73 | — | — | — |
| 2022-06-14 | $0.73 | — | — | — |
| 2022-03-14 | $0.73 | — | — | — |
| 2021-12-14 | $0.71 | — | — | — |
| 2021-09-14 | $0.71 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — if the last quarter repeats
Live · as of 2026-08-19 08:54Even the bull case prices 20% below today — the ratio here measures the model-vs-market gap, not payoff odds. Another quarter like the worst recent one costs 100%. Caveat: the company is pre-profit — scenario margins are a glide-path assumption, not a track record.
| Case | Growth | Margin | Fair value | vs price ($135.25) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bull — recovery | +9% | 30.8% | $107.71 | -20% |
| Base — stabilizes | +6% | 26.7% | $83.88 | -38% |
| Bear — keeps slipping | +3% | 22.7% | $63.53 | -53% |
| Stress — last quarter repeats | +10% | -10.6% | $0.00 | -100% |
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Claude Reading
Looking at the raw quarterly cadence first: revenue has walked from $6.95B (Q2'24) to $6.96B (Q1'26) — that's essentially flat, and the reported 4.2% revenue CAGR is flattered by the 2021-2025 comp window. Q1'26 at $6.96B is actually *down* from Q4'25's $7.93B (seasonal, but the year-over-year read is +4.4% vs Q1'25's $6.67B, so real but modest). The eye-catching "earnings CAGR 22.6%" and "recent earnings YoY 1673%" are noise — 2024 GAAP NI was crushed to $480M by the CymaBay/IPR&D writedowns that also tanked operating income to $1.66B on $28.75B revenue. Normalize that and you get a company earning roughly $8-9B annually on ~$29B revenue with 34% operating margins in clean years. That's the actual baseline, not the growth story the momentum table implies.
On valuation, 19.9x P/E, 6.3x EV/revenue, and 17.8x EV/EBITDA are *not* cheap for a business compounding revenue at 2-4%. The synthesis's $136.89 signal-adjusted fair value essentially says "priced correctly" — I agree with the number but disagree with the "slight upside" framing. At 5% FCF yield ($9.46B FCF on $167.9B cap) with $24.94B debt against $7.56B cash (net debt ~$17.4B, so EV ~$185B and FCF yield on EV closer to 5.1%), you're being paid a mid-single-digit yield to underwrite the Biktarvy 2033 cliff, lenacapavir launch execution, and an oncology segment (Trodelvy, Kite) that has repeatedly disappointed. ROE of 37.6% and ROIC of 21.8% look pristine but are inflated by buyback-shrunken equity ($22.6B) and the goodwill impairments already taken. This is a fair-value stock, not a bargain.
Where I push back on the prior models: the Market Forces layer calls this "Market Tailwinds" and the Pre-Flight talks up oncology optionality — but the Thesis Evaluation's -4 score (bear mass slightly exceeds bull) is closer to my read, and it directly contradicts the tailwind framing. The two insider sales on 2026-07-15 (unnamed, tiny 3,000-share lots) are correctly flagged neutral but worth noting there's zero insider buying on a stock that pulled back from $157 to $135 — if management saw a bargain, we'd expect at least token accumulation. Debt/equity at 1.10x is manageable but not fortress; current ratio 1.55 is fine. The narrative layer's "anchored, minimal intensity, no premium/discount" call is the most honest read in the file — this is a bond-substitute pharma and should be valued as one. The contrarian argument I'd actually make is bearish, not bullish: if lenacapavir PrEP pricing gets compressed by payers (very live risk given the $28K/year ask vs. generic TDF), the 68-weight bull pillar collapses and you're left owning a declining HIV franchise at 20x earnings with a patent cliff five years out. The bull case requires lenacapavir to *both* land commercially *and* have Trodelvy expand meaningfully — two independent execution bets, not one.
Net: I dissent modestly from the "slight upside" verdict and land on fairly valued with a bearish tilt. Fair value in the $125-135 range on 15-17x normalized $8.5B NI plus a modest oncology option premium; current $135.25 sits at the top of that. The 2.38% dividend yield with 47% payout ratio gives you downside cushion but caps upside — this doesn't re-rate higher without lenacapavir data beats or a Trodelvy label win, neither of which is imminent. I'd want $115-120 to take a real position, and I'd trim above $150. The synthesis models are directionally reasonable but the "tailwinds" and "slight upside" framings are one notch too optimistic given the flat revenue trajectory and unrewarded execution risk on the two catalysts that matter.
GPT Reading
At $135, Gilead looks more expensive than the “steady compounder” label implies. The raw business is good: 2025 revenue reached $29.44B, up from $28.75B in 2024 and roughly flat-to-up versus the $27.1B-$27.3B range of 2021-2023, while free cash flow was a robust $9.46B on just $563M of capex. Gross margin at 78.8% and operating cash flow of $10.02B show the core franchise still throws off real money. But the key point is that this is not a business compounding top line at a rate that deserves much optimism premium. Quarterly revenue has run $6.67B, $7.08B, $7.77B, $7.93B, then back to $6.96B in the latest quarter; that’s stable, not accelerating. Latest-quarter revenue growth of about 4.3% year over year versus the $6.67B quarter a year earlier is perfectly respectable for mature pharma, but it does not scream that the market should pay nearly 20x earnings, 5.8x sales, and 17.8x EV/EBITDA for a company with obvious patent and portfolio-transition risk.
What stands out most is how much of the “earnings recovery” is really just normalization after a terrible 2024 profit year. Net income went from only $480M in 2024 to $8.51B in 2025, which makes momentum metrics look explosive, but the five-year context matters: 2021 net income was $6.23B, 2022 was $4.59B, 2023 was $5.67B. So 2025 is not evidence of a new earnings regime; it is more a rebound to a level somewhat better than historical norms. The same issue shows up in quarterly margins. 2025-03 posted just 19.7% net margin, then 27.7%, then an unusually high 39.3%, then 27.5%, and the latest quarter came in at 29%. That is healthy, but not cleanly trending upward. If anything, Gilead is demonstrating resilience rather than step-change growth. For a resilience story, a 2.4% dividend yield is fine but not compelling enough by itself to support a rich multiple when net debt is still roughly $17.4B and debt/equity is 1.10.
The balance sheet and cash generation argue against a bearish disaster case, but they do not argue for paying up. Equity is only $22.62B against a $167.9B market cap, hence the 7.5x price/book; that’s not a problem in pharma by itself, but it underscores that investors are valuing future cash flows heavily and leaving little room for disappointment. On 2025 free cash flow of $9.46B, the stock trades at roughly a 5.6% FCF yield. For a company growing revenue low single digits and facing eventual exclusivity cliffs in its most important franchise, that feels closer to fair-to-full than cheap. The market seems to be giving substantial credit for pipeline durability and oncology optionality already. I don’t see enough in the provided numbers to say that credit is unearned entirely, but I do think the valuation synthesis calling this basically fair is too forgiving because it treats normalized profitability as if it were securely repeatable while the top line remains merely stable.
The best argument against my skepticism is straightforward: this company may deserve a premium because very few mega-cap biopharmas combine 79% gross margins, 34% operating margins, $10B of operating cash flow, and recent quarterly net margins around 27%-29% with only modest capital intensity. If 2024 was the aberration and 2025 is the real baseline, then a sub-20x P/E is not stretched for a defensive healthcare name with ROIC above 21%, a manageable payout ratio near 47%, and clear room to keep funding R&D, buybacks, and the dividend. A bull would also note that revenue has not rolled over despite the market’s constant anxiety about franchise aging, and that the move from $28.75B to $29.44B annual revenue plus improved profitability suggests management is executing better than bears allow. I weigh that differently because the valuation already assumes the base business remains durable; investors are not buying Gilead at a distressed multiple where mere stability creates upside.
What would change my mind is evidence that the business can grow through its transition rather than simply milk legacy assets. Specifically, I’d want to see at least two to three consecutive quarters above $7.5B of revenue excluding obvious one-offs, with net income margins holding above 28% and annualized free cash flow tracking above $10B sustainably. That would support a case that 2025 was the start of a higher earnings plateau, not a rebound year. On the downside, if revenue slips back toward the $27B-$28B annual band or quarterly net margins fall back into the teens, the stock would look plainly over-earning versus its multiple. At $135, I think fair value is nearer $115-$125 unless growth evidence becomes more concrete.
Grok Reading
Gilead’s 2025 numbers restore the picture the 2024 collapse temporarily obscured. Revenue of $29.44B grew only 2.4% year-over-year, consistent with the 4.2% multi-year CAGR, but operating income snapped back to $10.02B and net income to $8.51B—margins of 34% and 29% that sit at the top of the five-year range and reverse the $1.66B operating-income trough of 2024. Free cash flow of $9.46B on just $563M of capex produces a 5.6% FCF yield at the $168B enterprise and a clean 32% FCF conversion rate; ROIC of 22% and ROE of 38% confirm the capital base is still highly productive. Quarterly run-rates remain orderly: the last four quarters averaged roughly $7.4B in sales with net margins oscillating between 20% and 39%, the March 2026 print of $6.96B and 29% margin looking like a normal seasonal trough rather than deterioration. At 20× trailing earnings, 5.8× sales and 18× EV/EBITDA the market is simply capitalizing that cash-engine multiple with almost no growth premium, which matches the 2% dividend and 47% payout.
The story the raw data tell is therefore a high-quality mature earner whose true earning power reasserted itself once one-time charges rolled off. Net debt of roughly $17B against $9.5B of annual FCF is manageable, the current ratio of 1.55 is adequate, and the balance-sheet leverage (D/E 1.10) does not constrain the dividend or modest buybacks. Insider sales of a few thousand shares are noise. The valuation synthesis landing at $137 versus the $135 print is directionally correct; the stock is priced as a bond substitute with HIV cash flows and a modest oncology call option.
The strongest counter-argument is that 20× earnings and 18× EBITDA are not cheap for a company whose top line is stuck at low-single-digit growth and whose core franchise faces a well-telegraphed Biktarvy exclusivity cliff. A smart bear would note that 2025’s $8.5B net income is a peak-cycle print after an artificially depressed base, that hepatitis C continues to shrink, and that Trodelvy plus the CAR-T franchise have yet to demonstrate they can replace HIV dollars at equivalent margins. If lenacapavir PrEP uptake disappoints or oncology remains subscale, the multiple compresses toward 15–16× and the stock’s downside opens toward the mid-$100s. I weigh this less heavily because the FCF durability and 79% gross margin give Gilead more time and optionality than a typical patent-cliff story, but the growth scarcity is real and keeps me from calling the name cheap.
I would flip to a clear undervalued stance on two consecutive quarters of revenue growth above 6% driven by measurable lenacapavir contribution, or on Trodelvy earlier-line breast-cancer data that lifts oncology run-rate by $1B-plus annually. Conversely, any explicit guidance cut tied to Biktarvy erosion or a clinical setback that removes the long-acting HIV/PrEP narrative would push me to overvalued and a mid-teens multiple.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Gilead prints roughly $9-10B of free cash flow annually on $27-29B of revenue, with gross margins parked in the high 70s (78.8% in 2025) and a 2025 operating margin of 34%. Earnings quality checks are pristine: accruals -7.7% of assets, OCF/NI 5.79x, Beneish M -2.45, Altman Z 4.29. Share count has been flat-to-down (diluted CAGR -0.1%) with buybacks running ~160% of SBC and SBC only 3% of revenue - management is protecting per-share value. The 2024 operating margin collapse to 5.8% and net income of $480M is the one glaring anomaly in the tape, but FCF that year was still $10.3B and 2025 reverted to $8.5B net income at 34% op margin, consistent with a large non-cash IPR&D or acquisition-related charge rather than an operating deterioration. Balance sheet is the softest spot: net cash is -$17.3B against $7.6B liquid, so debt is a real constraint, but $9B+ annual FCF services it comfortably. Insider tape is immaterial (two small routine sales). Overall this is a durable, well-run mature earner with no forensic red flags but also no fortress balance sheet and a revenue base that has been effectively flat for five years ($27.3B to $29.4B).
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Nature of the 2024 operating margin collapse - was it an IPR&D charge tied to CymaBay or similar M&A, and is it truly non-recurring?
- Debt maturity schedule and weighted average coupon on the ~$25B gross debt stack
- HIV franchise (Biktarvy) concentration as a share of revenue and loss-of-exclusivity timing
- Pipeline contribution: lenacapavir launch trajectory and oncology (Trodelvy) growth to offset flat top line
- Whether the two July 2026 insider sales were 10b5-1 scheduled or discretionary
The composite fair value of $116.26 sits ~14% below the $135.25 price, but the signal-adjusted FV of $136.89 lands almost exactly on the tape (1% upside). The DCF at $138.56 and anchored P/E at $132.82 cluster tightly around the current quote, telling a consistent story: the market has priced this mature pharma about right. The EPV floor of $55 is a runaway low-end input (it implies zero credit for the pipeline or franchise durability) and should be discounted, not treated as the base case. Earnings quality is clean, so no haircut is warranted; the strong-quality lens supports the deserved value rather than pushing it higher. What's priced in is the steady-compounder story: durable HIV cash flows, manageable patent cliffs, oncology optionality that offsets but doesn't accelerate. For this to be cheap, you'd need pipeline surprises or margin expansion the tape isn't giving credit for; for it to be rich, you'd need the bear's value-trap thesis (HIV generic erosion outrunning oncology) to bite. Neither is obvious, so the honest read is: fair.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- HIV franchise erosion pace vs. lenacapavir uptake in next guidance update
- Oncology segment (Trodelvy, CAR-T) growth trajectory and margin contribution
- Any one-time charges distorting the ugly GAAP quarter flagged by quality lens
- Capital return pace - buyback tempo vs. debt paydown priorities
GILD sits in a quiet sentiment pocket. The active narrative is a low-intensity, durable steady-compounder read - no cult, no mania, no collapse - so there is very little narrative energy pushing the tape either way. Q2 2026 print was constructive: 10% base business growth, PrEP/Yeztugo doubling to $1B, raised HIV guidance, revenue beat. That is a mild positive drip, but the stock 'edged lower' post-print and remains 'in a downtrend' per the news flow, which tells you the buy-side is not chasing and the acquisition-driven EPS loss muddied the headline. The AHF 'Corporate Welfare King' piece adds a small reputational nag but is not a real pressure. With beta 0.34, the risk-on tape barely touches this name - macro is essentially neutral here. Higher rates and a 26.9 market PE are a mild background headwind for defensive pharma (bond-proxy dynamic), but Gilead's cash yield cushions it. Net: fundamentals slightly better than the story, narrative is inert, tape is neutral-to-mildly-positive on the print, downtrend in the chart says positioning is unenthused. Balanced with a very faint tailwind lean.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Whether the post-earnings downtrend breaks or the stock rolls over into the next few sessions
- Sell-side target revisions following the raised HIV guide
- Any rotation signal into defensive pharma if the tape wobbles
- Yeztugo uptake curve in next print - the one place a narrative could actually form
This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.
When we made this prediction on Aug 5, 2026, GILD was $135.25. We expect it to be $139.50 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $115.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 5, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.