Loading institutional data...
Loading institutional data...
No institutional (13F) filings cover this company, so the Overview and 13F tabs are thin. Everything drawn from its SEC filings is here.
Loading snapshot...
Loading financials...
Loading valuation...
Loading analysis...
Loading dividends & returns...
Loading capital allocation...
Loading debt & leverage...
Loading performance...
Loading peer comparison...
Solve the discounted cash flow backwards, then stress-test the assumptions.
This company doesn't have positive free cash flow on any basis, so a reverse DCF can't be run.
Ranked against 36 sector peers with collected financials. Valuation from latest close × latest fiscal-year fundamentals; 13F conviction as of 2026-09-30.
Percentile is “goodness” within the peer set (100 = best). For valuation and leverage that means cheaper / less-levered ranks higher.
| Company | Mkt cap ▼ | P/E | EV/EBITDA | P/S | Rev gr | Gross | Net | ROE | ROIC | Net D/EBITDA | 13F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCRX | $1.5B | 227.4× | 15.1× | 2.0× | 3.6% | 79.4% | 1.0% | 1.0% | 0.7% | 1.9× | 48 |
| ANAB | $1.4B | — | 5.8× | 6.2× | 157% | — | -5.6% | -35.6% | -35.6% | -0.6× | 28 |
| NKTR | $1.3B | — | — | 24.0× | -43.9% | 100% | -297% | -183% | -183% | — | 23 |
| OPK | $1.2B | — | — | 2.0× | -14.9% | 33.9% | -37.2% | -17.8% | -14.0% | — | 32 |
| CRON | $1.2B | — | — | 8.3× | 24.6% | 42.8% | -6.4% | -0.9% | -0.9% | — | 34 |
| AMPH | $1.2B | 13.7× | 9.5× | 1.6× | -1.7% | 49.5% | 13.6% | 12.4% | 7.0% | 2.6× | 44 |
| MRVI | $1.2B | — | — | 6.3× | -28.3% | 18.3% | -70.4% | -61.6% | -25.9% | — | 20 |
| MNKD | $1.1B | 175.0× | 30.0× | 3.2× | 22.2% | 92.3% | 1.7% | -11.5% | 1.9% | 6.0× | 48 |
| HROW | $1.1B | — | — | 3.9× | 36.4% | 75.1% | -1.9% | -9.8% | -1.7% | — | 36 |
| RIGL | $958M | 2.6× | 7.6× | 3.3× | 64.1% | 93.3% | — | 93.8% | 82.7% | 0.1× | 29 |
| TBPH | $884M | 8.3× | — | 8.2× | 66.9% | — | 98.5% | 35.7% | 35.7% | — | 1 |
| CYRX | $876M | 12.3× | — | 5.0× | 12.4% | 47.1% | 44.4% | 15.6% | 15.6% | — | 26 |
| ARDX | $782M | — | — | 1.9× | 22.1% | 90.3% | -15.1% | -36.9% | -16.7% | — | 30 |
| COLL | $775M | 13.8× | 3.0× | 1.0× | 23.6% | 59.3% | 8.1% | 20.8% | 20.8% | -1.3× | 40 |
| ACHV | $704M | — | — | — | — | — | — | -254% | -254% | — | — |
| LXRX | $632M | — | — | 12.7× | 60.2% | 99.4% | -101% | -46.8% | -31.2% | — | 18 |
| ACRS | $615M | — | — | 78.6× | -58.2% | 73.3% | -830% | -63.0% | -63.0% | — | 20 |
| ZVRA | $610M | 7.6× | — | 5.7× | 351% | — | 78.2% | 53.8% | 38.4% | — | 27 |
| MYGN | $607M | — | — | 0.7× | -1.6% | 69.9% | -44.4% | -99.4% | -75.0% | — | 23 |
| IRWD | $578M | 23.3× | 3.6× | 1.9× | -15.7% | — | 8.1% | -9.2% | -9.2% | -2.2× | 36 |
| PBYI | $539M | 17.1× | 14.7× | 2.4× | -0.9% | 74.5% | 13.6% | 23.9% | 17.7% | 0.4× | 31 |
| AMRN | $509M | — | — | 2.4× | -6.5% | 56.6% | -18.2% | -8.4% | -8.4% | — | 9 |
| GYRE | $484M | 228.0× | 31.1× | 4.2× | 10.2% | 95.4% | 8.5% | 15.8% | 15.8% | -3.5× | 7 |
| SVA | $465M | — | — | 1.2× | 6.8% | 67.9% | -51.5% | -4.5% | -4.0% | — | 2 |
| TKNO | $454M | — | — | 11.2× | 7.4% | 33.2% | -42.6% | -25.1% | -21.1% | — | 11 |
Peers = companies sharing ACHV's sector (In Vitro & In Vivo Diagnostic Substances) with collected SEC financials. Multiples use the most recent end-of-day close and latest fiscal-year fundamentals (trailing, not forward). Missing cells mean the peer never reported that line item, has no collected price, or has a non-positive denominator. Not investment advice.
What the company returns to shareholders — and whether it's covered by cash.
No dividend to cover. Last year: $0 dividends + $0 buybacks = $0 returned on -$49.5M FCF.
Yields use the latest fiscal-year dividends/buybacks over current market cap. Dividends and buybacks from the SEC cash-flow statement; payout coverage vs net income and free cash flow. Educational — not a recommendation.
How management deployed cash over 10 years — and what it earned on reinvestment.
A reinvestment story — most cash went back into growth rather than to shareholders.
Insufficient data. Current ROIC on all capital: -254%. Rough measure (includes maintenance capex).
Cash uses aggregated from the SEC cash-flow statement over 10 fiscal years. "Return on reinvestment" is a rough proxy — operating-income change ÷ cumulative CapEx + M&A — and includes maintenance capex. Educational — not a recommendation.
EOD close · as of 2026-10-30
How a revenue dollar becomes profit — FY2025
Each value shows its share of revenue below it (common-size).
| Line Item | FY2025 | FY2024 | FY2023 | FY2022 | FY2021 | FY2020 | FY2019 | FY2018 | FY2017 | FY2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | — | — | — | — | — | — | $0 | $0 | — | — |
| Research & Development | — | $22.8M | $15.8M | $30.1M | $24.0M | $6.9M | $9.7M | $5.9M | $3.1M | $286K |
| Selling, General & Admin | — | $16.3M | $11.4M | $10.7M | $9.1M | $7.9M | $6.9M | $6.9M | $3.5M | $1.4M |
| Total Operating Expenses | $54.9M | $39.1M | $27.3M | $40.8M | $33.1M | $14.8M | $16.5M | $12.8M | $6.6M | $1.7M |
| Interest Expense | $819K | $2.2M | $2.9M | $1.8M | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest & Investment Income | $1.5M | $2.4M | $825K | $199K | $17K | $69K | $170K | $171K | $21K | $203K |
| Other Income (Expense), net | $232K | -$758K | -$2.6M | -$1.6M | -$58K | $20K | $133K | $126K | -$7.0M | -$24K |
| Pretax Income | -$54.6M | -$39.8M | -$29.8M | -$42.4M | -$33.2M | -$14.7M | -$16.4M | -$12.7M | -$13.6M | -$1.7M |
| Income Tax Expense | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | $0 |
| Net Income | -$54.6M | -$39.8M | -$29.8M | -$42.4M | -$33.2M | -$14.7M | -$16.4M | -$12.7M | -$10.6M | -$1.2M |
| Per Share | ||||||||||
| EPS (Basic) | -$1.25 | -$1.24 | -$1.50 | -$4.00 | -$4.08 | -$5.42 | — | — | — | — |
| EPS (Diluted) | -$1.25 | -$1.24 | -$1.50 | -$4.00 | -$4.08 | -$5.42 | — | — | — | — |
| Weighted Avg Shares (Basic) | 43.6M | 32.1M | 19.8M | 10.6M | 8.1M | 2.7M | — | — | — | — |
| Weighted Avg Shares (Diluted) | 43.6M | 32.1M | 19.8M | 10.6M | 8.1M | 2.7M | — | — | — | — |
Source: SEC EDGAR XBRL filings (annual, fiscal year). Quarterly flow items are derived from cumulative filings; balance-sheet figures are as-of each period end. Ratios and margins are computed, not reported.
How much the company owes, how it's trended, and how comfortably it's serviced.
Insufficient EBITDA/debt history.
Green ≤ 1.5× · amber ≤ 3× · red > 3× (leverage relative to cash earnings).
Interest expense isn't separately reported — often netted into “other income (expense), net.”
Cash vs short-term debt unavailable.
Short-term / long-term split not separately reported.
Debt, cash, interest and equity from the SEC balance sheet & income statement. Effective rate = interest ÷ average debt. Educational — not a recommendation.
Total return (dividends reinvested) vs the market, from quarter-end prices.
Above 0 = ahead of the S&P 500 since the window start; below 0 = behind. Rising means it's pulling ahead.
How far the stock fell below its prior peak. Deeper, longer drawdowns = a rougher ride to the same return.
Quarter-end, dividend-adjusted (total return). Beta & volatility from quarterly returns (annualized). Benchmark is the S&P 500 (SPY total return). Annual returns compound the quarters ending in each calendar year; the first and last years in a window may be partial. Past performance doesn't predict future results.
EOD close · as of 2026-10-30
Where each multiple sits in its own 14-yr range · 92th pct blended
Dot = today · shaded = middle 50% · line = median. Lower percentile = cheaper vs its own 14-yr history.
Is the profit real, and how strong is the balance sheet?
FY2025 · every deduction from revenue to net income
DuPont — the three levers
ROE -254% against ROIC -254% — 0% of the return on equity comes from leverage and buybacks rather than from the operating business.
Equity is the year-end figure. On average equity over the two year-ends, ROE is -257.7% — the two diverge when buybacks or issuance move equity during the year.
What the company owes vs. what it holds
This shows debt/cash structure and net leverage. The year-by-year maturity schedule is on the Debt & Leverage tab.
Latest year: profit growth vs revenue growth
Operating leverage needs meaningful revenue change.
Each line as % of revenue — the trend in color
| % of revenue | FY2018 | FY2019 | FY2020 | FY2021 | FY2022 | FY2023 | FY2024 | FY2025 |
|---|
Green = margin-favorable vs the row's own range · red = unfavorable.
The metrics that matter, over time
A 30-second read on ACHV: price, valuation and headline fundamentals from SEC filings. The four questions at the top of the page are where the judgements live.
No positive operating income in the last three years, so there is no return on capital to compare against its cost.
Return on equity (-254%) and return on invested capital (-254%) are within a couple of points in FY2025, so the headline return is the operating return — there is no meaningful leverage effect to strip out.
No material counter-signal in the checked set: ROIC vs WACC spread, 5-year spread history, gross margin trend, operating margin trend, net margin against 3 years ago, revenue growth, ROIC ex-goodwill gap.
Missing from our data, so excluded from this answer: tax_rate.
Fewer than three profitable years with a cash flow statement, so cash conversion cannot be judged.
No material counter-signal in the checked set: FCF / net income over 3 and 5 years, Sloan accruals, SBC as a share of revenue, SBC as a share of operating cash flow, SBC-adjusted free cash flow, free cash flow per diluted share, buybacks against SBC issued, capex vs depreciation, free cash flow against revenue, share count since the first year on file, cash conversion cycle (DSO, DIO, DPO), receivables growth against revenue growth.
Missing from our data, so excluded from this answer: 3 years of cash flow.
Debt is present but there is no positive EBITDA or no reported interest expense, so coverage cannot be measured.
Balance sheet at 2025-12-31. Undrawn revolving credit is not shown: the tag is collected but not yet mapped through to the API.
No material counter-signal in the checked set: net debt / EBITDA, interest coverage, stressed coverage, maturity schedule vs cash and one year of FCF, liquidity ratios.
Missing from our data, so excluded from this answer: ebitda.
No positive free cash flow to discount, so the price cannot be expressed as a growth requirement.
The percentile ranks the FISCAL-YEAR point, because the distribution behind each strip is built from fiscal-year closes — ranking a TTM figure inside it would compare two different bases. No TTM point: the four most recent quarters do not form a usable window.
No material counter-signal in the checked set: reverse-DCF implied growth, historical FCF CAGR, per-year FCF growth distribution, reporting-basis breaks, discount rate used, free-cash-flow basis (stock comp charged?).
Missing from our data, so excluded from this answer: free_cash_flow.