Why we don't show a single “fair value” for BIO
Even the optimistic scenario of a conservative trailing-FCF model ($138.77) sits far below today's price — the market is paying for growth and durability beyond what this model structure captures. The honest lens is the question below: what growth does today's price actually require? The model scenarios are listed further down for reference.
What would today's price require?
$314.46 is justified only if free cash flow grows about +27.0% a year (fading to 2.5% long-run) at a 9.5% required return — faster than the company has actually grown.
| Scenario | FCF growth (fading to 2.5%) | Discount | Value / share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 0.5%/yr | 10.5% | $74.60 |
| Base case | 2.0%/yr | 9.5% | $97.26 |
| Optimistic | 5.0%/yr | 8.5% | $138.77 |
Current Price
$314.46
Market-Implied Growth
+27.0%/yr
vs -7.6% 5Y actual
Base-Case Model Value
$97.26
model output — not a price target
Edit the assumptions to see how they change the estimated fair value. Opens seeded with TGM's data-driven base case for BIO (growth from its own 5-year record, discount from its beta), so the sandbox starts where the scenarios above leave off. Illustrative model — not investment advice.
Base inputs: FCF $242.2M · 0.03B shares · net debt $844.8M
Estimated Fair Value
$97.26
-69.1% vs $314.46
How the estimated fair value shifts with the discount rate (WACC) and terminal growth, holding your 2.0%/yr FCF growth and 10-year horizon fixed. Green = above today's $314.46; red = below. Your current case is outlined.
| WACC ↓ / Terminal → | 1.50% | 2.00% | 2.50% | 3.00% | 3.50% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.5% | $124 | $135 | $148 | $165 | $186 |
| 8.5% | $101 | $109 | $119 | $130 | $143 |
| 9.5% | $84.77 | $90.61 | $97.26 | $105 | $114 |
| 10.5% | $71.84 | $76.27 | $81.25 | $86.88 | $93.31 |
| 11.5% | $61.49 | $64.95 | $68.79 | $73.07 | $77.88 |
