Why we don't show a single “fair value” for BIO
Even the optimistic scenario of a conservative trailing-FCF model ($142.32) 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?
$369.32 is justified only if free cash flow grows about +30.4% a year (fading to 2.5% long-run) at a 9.4% required return — faster than the company has actually grown.
| Scenario | FCF growth (fading to 2.5%) | Discount | Value / share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 0.5%/yr | 10.4% | $76.25 |
| Base case | 2.0%/yr | 9.4% | $99.56 |
| Optimistic | 5.0%/yr | 8.4% | $142.32 |
Current Price
$369.32
Market-Implied Growth
+30.4%/yr
vs -9.7% 5Y actual
Base-Case Model Value
$99.56
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
$99.56
-73.0% vs $369.32
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 $369.32; red = below. Your current case is outlined.
| WACC ↓ / Terminal → | 1.50% | 2.00% | 2.50% | 3.00% | 3.50% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.4% | $127 | $139 | $153 | $170 | $192 |
| 8.4% | $104 | $112 | $122 | $133 | $147 |
| 9.4% | $86.62 | $92.66 | $99.56 | $108 | $117 |
| 10.4% | $73.32 | $77.89 | $83.03 | $88.86 | $95.52 |
| 11.4% | $62.71 | $66.27 | $70.22 | $74.63 | $79.60 |
