Search This Blog

Friday, May 7, 2021

Pfizer Chair and CEO Albert Bourla Speaks with CNBC’s 'The Exchange'

 Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC exclusive interview with Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla on CNBC’s “The Exchange” (M-F, 1PM-2PM ET) today, Tuesday, May 4. Following is a link to video on CNBC.com: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/05/04/pfizer-ceo-no-variant-identified-so-far-that-escapes-our-vaccine-protection.html.

MEG TIRRELL: And Albert thanks for being here. You know you reported Q1 results this morning and let’s start right there with what Kelly mentioned about Jim’s comments this morning about sort of the head scratching reaction from your stock to the results, not just the COVID vaccine which of course is blowing expectations out of the water, you forecast now $26 billion in sales this year, you’re forecasting durable revenue from the vaccine like a flu like market, you developed it in record time during a pandemic and you grew the rest of the business 8% during the first quarter and yet your stock is flat today, and only up about 8% year to date. What do you think is not resonating with Wall Street right now in terms of your business when you look in the face of everything that you’ve just done?

ALBERT BOURLA: Meg, when it comes to stock, I think that this is not a sprint, it’s a marathon. And actually this is not my own quote, this is the advice that Ian Read gave me when I took over. And what I know is that you need to have to do the right things, you need to have operational performance and the stock price will follow so right now I’m really focusing on creating more vaccines, producing more vaccines for the world, distributing them safely, making sure that we will be ready for the next pandemic, making sure that we will be ready for the variants that may escape the protection of our vaccine and of course investing in R&D.

TIRRELL: Well let’s talk about vaccinating the world, you know, Pfizer has said you’ve got manufacturing capacity for up to 2.5 billion doses in 2021, you’ve struck agreements for 1.6 billion doses, help us think about how to think about that capacity that’s not accounted for right now 900 million doses, if, if countries don’t strike deals for those doses, what do you think is the right thing to do in order to supply the world. Should rich countries buy them and donate them? Is there an agreement that could be worked out with COVAX, the World Health Organization facility? How do you think about the best way to supply your vaccine to the world this year?

BOURLA: Those doses which are at least 2.5 billion this year and will be 3 billion next year are for the whole world and price should not be an obstacle because we are giving these doses at tier pricing, the rich countries the high-income countries like the US, Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, they are paying one tier. The middle-income countries, they are paying half of this price and the low-income countries, they are offering these doses at cost. So right now, the price is not going to be the obstacle. We need to make sure that we have enough production for all and this is why we keep investing and this is why I feel very comfortable that we have this number for several reasons. One it is that we are having distribution and manufacturing networks across the world so for every stage of our manufacturing process, I have at least two or three manufacturing sites that are doing it so even if something goes wrong in one or the others could step in. The second is that right now our yields, our processes are so effective that we keep increasing the production and the third is our quality controls are so good that we haven’t rejected any single batch so far, or let’s say I think 1 million doses out of 425 million doses that we produced. So it’s, I’m very confident that we will have enough doses, it’s just coming in the next few months.

KELLY EVANS: Mr. Bourla, it’s Kelly here and thanks for joining us. What does the experiences in India and Brazil tell you about the efficacy of the vaccines and our bodies and generally antibodies in fighting COVID. You know there’s a lot of speculation right now that these resistance levels should be much higher among the population than they are. Does that mean it’s because of the variants that were susceptible to maybe getting it again, or that if people had resistance from being exposed or even from the vaccine they still could get it again? How frequently do you think we’re going to need booster shots or annuals, I mean is annual even frequently enough at this point, what’s your latest thinking about this?

BOURLA: First, let’s say that we should be looking at the data and with all the data I’ve collected so far, there is no variant that we have identified that escapes the protection of our vaccine. Even the South African has been, let’s say, being the one that it is the most challenging one. Our studies in South Africa demonstrated 100% efficacy and we know that it was not easy for all vaccines to demonstrate efficacy there. But nevertheless, we are working on new variants and because of the possibility that one of them will eventually evade the protection of our vaccine is there. So, we are developing right now, we have developed a variant of the South African mutant, but it is in the clinic and we are going to see if we need a specific vaccine or not, but that will also use as a regulatory pathway. What we want to do is to make sure that if a single variant is identified that it is escaping the protection of our vaccine, we will be ready within 100 days from that day to be able to have these manufacturers and the file submitted to regulatory authority.

TIRRELL: Albert, it’s Meg again. You know India and South Africa have requested that the intellectual property around the vaccines be waived so that they can manufacture the vaccines themselves. What is your response to this and whether it could increase the availability of the vaccine in those countries and around the world?

BOURLA: I don’t think that the waving of the intellectual property rights will do anything to their ability to manufacture. Clearly for the mRNA vaccine that I can speak, but it is our vaccine. Right now, the bottleneck is not manufacturing infrastructure because we have built enough starting from scratch. Bottlenecks are raw materials as raw materials are coming into manufacturing plants, we are increasing the production and those raw materials have provided enough support right now, scientific, technical, and other types of support to our providers of the raw materials which are highly specialized ingredients, so that we feel very, very comfortable that we will do 2.5 billion by the end of the year as I said 3 billion in total next year with the current situation. So, it’s not manufacturing capacity and by the way, I don’t think that any country right now is in a position to produce or any company mRNA right now over there because there’s no infrastructure ready. It’s not that we were producing vaccines before, and now we discovered another one, we were not producing mRNA vaccines before. So I truly believe that makes zero sense not to mention about the disincentives that will create the whole biotech industry, if waiving the patents, what does that mean in the next pandemic.

EVANS: And Mr. Bourla, it’s Kelly again. Let me just circle back for one second on, on this issue. So, let’s say I was fully vaccinated two weeks ago. How long, in terms of months, should I expect that protection to last would that take me through all of next winter?

BOURLA: Right now, we do have yearly data about six months and we know that six months post the second dose, we are having very strong protection. I have made comments publicly that we do expect that the booster likely would be needed somewhere between six and 12 months and this is based on all the evidence that we have seen, collectively, but remains to be proven and those evidence are based on people that they have COVID-19 vaccine after six months that they had the disease, the number of people that get an infection is getting higher, the fact that when you see our own protection data, although they maintain very high above 90% is 91%, and six months it used to be 95%, but the fact that we see immune-genericity data, but I say only that over the six months, there is a trend for declining. And also the fact that to protect against variants, you need very high immune responses because the, those variants have a tendency to create slower neutralizing types so with all of that in mind, it’s more likely than not that the booster will be needed between six and 12 months, and then we need to see likely it will be regular vaccinations to maintain the protection, but we don’t know yet for sure.

TIRRELL: And Albert, you mentioned that you have that six month follow up data and one of the things that allowed you to do is to prepare for filing for full approval of the vaccine which we understand, you said this morning, you will probably do by the end of this month here in the United States. What kind of timeline do you expect it might take you know for the FDA to weigh that and for there to be full approval granted and how will that change how we use the vaccine here in the US? Do you expect it could lead to more employers mandating it or schools mandating it especially of course as you’re waiting imminent news for 12 to 15 year olds for emergency use authorization?

BOURLA: Thank you, Meg. It wouldn’t be appropriate for me to commend how fast FDA will do it. FDA will do it in the speed that they feel comfortable so that they can review the file and this is the right thing to do. Now what could change if we have a full authorization under the emergency use authorization, you can commercialize the vaccine on the, only under specific guidance from the government. So, we cannot just give it to employers or CVS privately or to other to Walgreens, other vaccination chains or the physicians cannot purchase it and use it in their practices. If you get full authorization, those channels are going to open. That being said, right now the government is still very, very engaged in contracts with us so I think still in the foreseeable future, a very big part of this business will be driven by government practices.

TIRRELL: Right Albert Bourla that makes sense and I should note my question might have been misleading, as you’re only planning to file for full approval at ages 16 and up at the end of this month. Thanks again, Albert, we appreciate you being with us.

BOURLA: Thank you very much.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/04/cnbc-exclusive-cnbc-transcript-pfizer-chairman-and-ceo-albert-bourla-speaks-with-cnbcs-the-exchange-today.html

Rep. Mike Turner: COVID vaccines brought to you by capitalism -- innovation worth protecting

 In response to the continued struggles of countries like India to combat the coronavirus, President Biden’s administration recently announced their support for a dangerously misguided solution: Waiving intellectual property (IP) rights of companies that developed COVID vaccines.

This decision comes after countries like India and South Africa have pressed the World Trade Organization (WTO) for an agreement known as the TRIPS Waiver, that would suspend the "implementation, application and enforcement" of IP protections for products that prevent and contain COVID. Some U.S. lawmakers have also pushed for this.

President Biden and other leaders attempting to deliver on COVID diplomacy are missing something major—the COVID vaccines by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson weren’t a direct product of the U.S. government, they were largely a result of capitalism.

In fact, the vaccines that were a direct result of government initiatives, that of China and Russia, failed miserably. While so many voices are currently criticizing capitalism and advocating for socialist outcomes, there is no greater example of the success of capitalism than the rapid development and deployment of the most effective COVID vaccines in the world. 


Dissolving patent rights is a short-sighted move that would undermine the system that successfully produced vaccines in the first place and would create consequences for U.S. security.

Few understand that years before the pandemic, U.S. pharmaceutical companies were already researching the mRNA technology which underpins COVID vaccines. These capabilities were rooted in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry being the most capable and innovative in the world. Despite repeated attempts by China to compete with American industry through campaigns like "Made in China 2025," year after year, America continues to lead the world in medical and technological advancements.

It is also crucial to recognize that the development of vaccines by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson were not directly funded by the U.S. government. Moderna was the only vaccine developed in the U.S. with the help of taxpayer dollars, but the private investment into the company’s research and development was essential. 

The U.S. government’s main role came after innovation: purchase and distribution. The U.S. has purchased millions of Pfizer and Moderna vaccine doses. Following acquisition, the U.S. government played a logistical role in vaccine distribution. For instance, the National Guard was utilized to help administer vaccines in states across the country. 

The U.S. government was mainly the customer of corporate, market-driven companies, not their creator. A successful vaccine rollout was largely a product of private company’s innovation strengthened by government efficiency.


This was flawlessly captured by the CEO of Johnson and Johnson Alex Gorsky in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. Speaking of the vaccine creation and distribution in the U.S., Gorsky stated it was a "golden moment" for the biopharmaceutical industry. "We fundamentally believe that having a market-based, innovation-based, biopharmaceutical as well as a medical-technology environment, is critical long term to produce the best overall outcomes for healthcare."

Waiving these IP protections could cause future investors to hesitate in investing in medical and pharmaceutical advancements that may be needed for future crises.  President Biden should reflect on these words and also consider the series of national security implications for waiving IP protections. As reported on by the Washington Post, India has worked for years to weaken WTO intellectual property protections. 

Also, producing mRNA vaccines is an incredibly complex process. It could be challenging for countries not currently involved in advanced mRNA research to undertake the production and distribution of an mRNA vaccine, especially considering the urgency behind the need for countries to access vaccines. 

Another solution is already in effect. The U.S. has generously donated vaccines to other countries. As U.S. vaccinations increase, President Biden should consider continued efforts to donate vaccines to countries in need. 

The TRIPS Waiver is the wrong solution to respond to the pandemic at the expense of future innovation. It will give adversaries like China a way to source a competitive advantage against us for tomorrow’s battles, such as future pandemics. 

Many individuals, including supporters of this waiver agreement, have grown too accustomed to demonizing capitalism and the pharmaceutical industry. Even they must not ignore that America's successful COVID vaccine rollout is the greatest case for capitalism in our lifetime. That is worth protecting.

Republican Mike Turner represents Ohio in the U.S. House of Representatives where serves as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/covid-vaccines-capitalism-innovation-rep-mike-turner

Is Inovio Stock A Sell After U.S. Officials Cut Funding For Covid Vaccine?

 

The Department of Defense pulled its funding for Inovio Pharmaceuticals' (INO) final-phase Covid vaccine test in late April, leading INO stock to crumble.

According to Inovio, the decision was based on the growing availability of Covid vaccines in the U.S. The department will continue funding Phase 2 testing. After that, Inovio says it will refocus on testing its vaccine outside the U.S.

The biotech company is working on a vaccine using pieces of DNA. It's combining the vaccine with a device that delivers a brief electrical pulse to open small pores in cells.

Last June, Inovio said its Covid vaccine was 94% effective in early-stage testing. But, in September, the Food and Drug Administration placed its Phase 2 and Phase 3 test on a clinical hold. It lifted the hold on Phase 2 testing in November. But Phase 3 testing was still on hold this month.

Shares of INO stock have made a roundtrip to their March 2020 point, trading well below 10 per share. The company has a large pipeline of drugs in development for cancer and infectious diseases. As of Dec. 31, it had $411.6 million in cash, non-cash equivalents and short-term investments.

All in all, is INO stock now a sell?

A Look At INO Stock Fundamentals

First, it's important to note Inovio isn't profitable and expects significant losses in the foreseeable future. In the fourth quarter, Inovio reported a 14-cent net loss per share compared with a loss of 38 cents per share in the year-ago period. Revenue was $5.6 million, up 2,000%.

Also of note, Inovio doesn't have a commercially approved product on the market. It was founded in 1983, while its DNA work dates to 2000. Its revenue is comprised of collaboration and development money. The biotech company has big biopharma partners like AstraZeneca (AZN) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN).

The revenue picture could change quickly if Inovio succeeds in making an effective coronavirus vaccine. The biotech also has a drug in Phase 3 testing to treat a precancerous condition of the cervix. It's partnered with privately held ApolloBio on that drug.

But INO stock isn't lining up with CAN SLIM rules for investing in growth stocks. Savvy investors should seek companies with at least 20%-25% recent earnings growth. Inovio stock isn't expected to get there anytime soon. (Learn more about IBD Digital to get CAN SLIM stock investing tips.)

Analysts surveyed by FactSet expect Inovio to report a 19-cent loss per share on $1.1 million in revenue in the current quarter. Revenue would fall 20%, but losses would narrow.

Currently, INO stock has a Composite Rating of 22 out of a best-possible 99. The Composite Rating is a 1-99 measure of a stock's key fundamental and technical growth measures. This means Inovio stock outranks less than a quarter of all stocks in terms of that metric.

In 2020, the biotech lost $1.07 per-share on $7.4 million in sales. Losses shrank year over year, while sales grew. For 2021, analysts surveyed by FactSet call for Inovio to lose 66 cents per share on $40 million in sales.

Inovio Stock Background

And its technicals demand a critical look. Inovio was essentially a dollar-stock in 2019, hitting as low as 1.91 in October 2019.

In February, INO stock catapulted to a five-month high, at 19, after investment firm BlackRock upped its stake in the biotech company and amid a Reddit call to action against short investors. But shares quickly tapered off. In April, shares plunged after the company lost its Covid vaccine funding.

Here's its background: Inovio was founded in 1983 under another name, Genetronics. At the time, it focused on a technological platform called electroporation. Electroporation is using controlled electrical pulses to create openings in cells. In theory, that should make them more permeable to drugs and other agents.

Then, Genetronics focused on developing drugs for cancer and dermatology. It also developed machines for electroporation to sell to research companies, according to the company's first U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

In the 1990s, Genetronics traded on the Vancouver Stock Exchange, American Stock Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange. It voluntarily delisted from the Vancouver exchange in 1998. It remained on the Toronto exchange until 2003.

Two years later, Genetronics acquired gene therapy company Inovio AS and changed its name to Inovio Biomedical. In 2006 and 2007, Inovio had to restate some of its financials. In 2009, Inovio merged with VGX Pharmaceuticals. That added a cancer vaccine to its pipeline.

A year later, Inovio Biomedical became Inovio Pharmaceuticals.

Gates Foundation, CEPI Award Inovio Grants

After merging with VGX, Inovio began focusing on DNA vaccines and electroporation delivery. But, in 2016, the fervor wavered after the Food and Drug Administration placed a key cancer vaccine on clinical hold. At the time, Inovio stock was also running hot on its Zika virus and influenza vaccines.

The next few years saw a downfall for INO stock, which plummeted to dollar-stock status.

But shares began a turn in January 2020 when the biotech company announced that the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, or CEPI, awarded it $9 million to develop a coronavirus vaccine. CEPI is a group of public, private and nonprofit organizations that fund vaccine development worldwide.

In March 2020, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation awarded Inovio $5 million to scale up its coronavirus vaccine delivery system. That followed a $1.6 million grant in 2016 to back its Zika virus vaccine.

Just eight analysts cover INO stock, according to MarketBeat.com. Three had buy ratings, four had hold ratings and one had a sell rating on May 5. But after the FDA put a hold on the Covid-19 vaccine Phase 3 trials, Cantor Fitzgerald lowered its price target on INO stock to 12 from 31. Maxim Group, though, upgraded the stock to buy from hold. Roth Capital also upgraded shares to neutral from a sell rating.

Analysts from outfits like HC Wainwright, RBC Capital Markets, Citigroup and Piper Sandler also cover Inovio stock.

As of March 31, 262 mutual funds owned 55.7 million shares of Inovio stock.

Technical Analysis Of INO Stock

Inovio stock hit a high mark of 33.79 last June after the biotech company received a $71 million contract from the U.S. Department of Defense to scale up manufacturing for its coronavirus vaccine. But in April, shares plummeted after the department withdrew funding for Phase 3 testing.

In 2020, INO stock rocketed 168% higher, albeit shares started the year at just 3.30. Today, the biotech company has a Relative Strength Rating of 1, putting it in the bottom 1% of stocks. The RS Rating pits all stocks against one another in terms of 12-month performance, on a scale of 1-99. Shares have also returned to dollar-stock status, trading around 6.50 on May 5.

The shares have a middling EPS Rating of 56. This reflects INO stock's continuing losses per share.

As of May 5, Inovio stock was below its 200-day moving average and 50-day line. Shares aren't forming a definite chart pattern. And, if a base forms, investors should take it with a grain of salt. It will be key to watch whether Inovio can launch a commercial product.


INO Stock: Coronavirus Vaccine News

The Department of Defense's decision wasn't based on Inovio or its product, the company said. Analysts say it's possible Inovio could still launch its vaccine and device internationally. The firm is also working on a vaccine to target all variants.

Phase 2 testing — which U.S. officials are still funding — resumed in late 2020. In March, the company said in early March it had finished enrolling 400 participants in midstage testing. But the Phase 3 test remains on hold. The Phase 2 test is expected to wrap this quarter.

In February, INO stock soared after a Reddit user called for a short squeeze of the stock. Also helping the biotech company: BlackRock, an investment management firm, upped its stake to more than 14.2 million shares. It now owns 8.4% of Inovio.

Is Inovio Stock A Sell Now?

INO stock isn't a sell as of May 5, but it's also not a buy. Shares aren't forming a specific chart pattern and, based on technical analysis, aren't showing the marks of winning stocks — strong growth in sales and earnings.

Investors are encouraged to buy a stock when it tops a buy point and is less than 5% extended from that entry. (Check out Stocks Near A Buy Zone.) Further, Inovio stock has weak Composite and RS Ratings. Its EPS Rating is much stronger, but remains below the upper echelon of stocks.

What is important, for now, is watching INO stock as the biotech company works to get back on track in developing coronavirus vaccine. Its DNA approach differs from traditional vaccines and from the newer messenger RNA approach.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ino-stock-buy-now/

SVB Leerink upgrades Epizyme, citing sales potential for lymphoma drug

 Shares of Epizyme Inc. EPZM, +21.51% were up 11.0% in premarket trading on Friday after SVB Leerink upgraded the company's stock to outperform, from market perform, citing Tazverik's potential opportunity in the follicular lymphoma market. Analyst Andrew Berens told investors that the drug's potential as a "maintenance" therapy could represent a "significant upside to current valuation." (Maintenance treatments can be used to prevent relapses of some cancers.) Berens said he had previously estimated the drug could generate $252 million in sales in 2030; now he sees the potential for $854 million in sales, including sales from both treatment and maintenance prescriptions. The Food and Drug Administration approved Tazerik as a therapy for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma in June of last year. Epizyme's stock is down 37.3% for the year, while the S&P 500 SPX, +0.79% is up 11.8%.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/svb-leerink-upgrades-epizyme-citing-sales-potential-for-lymphoma-drug-2021-05-07

Dynavax Demolishes Expectations With Q1 Results

 Who wouldn't love a stock that has more than doubled in a little over five months? That's exactly what Dynavax Technologies (NASDAQ:DVAX) has done, thanks partially to good news in April for its COVID-19 vaccine partner Valneva.

Dynavax announced its first-quarter results after the market closed on Thursday. Its momentum seems likely to continue, with the biotech stock rising nearly 6% in after-hours trading. Here are the highlights from Dynavax's Q1 update.

Dynavax reported revenue in the first quarter of $83.3 million. This was more than seven times greater than the company's revenue of $10.9 million in the prior-year period. It also trounced the Wall Street consensus estimate of $59.1 million.

The company announced net income in the first quarter of $891,000, or $0.01 per share, based on generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). That was a lot better than the GAAP net loss of $12.6 million, or $0.25 per share, posted in the prior-year period. And it beat the average analyst estimate of a net loss of $0.02 per share.

Dynavax ended the first quarter with cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments of $232.7 million. This reflected a solid increase from the $165 million on hand as of Dec. 31, 2020.


The big story for Dynavax in Q1 was the collaboration for its vaccine adjuvant CpG 1018. Dynavax recorded $74.6 million in net product revenue for the adjuvant. It didn't make a penny from CpG 1018 in the first quarter of 2020.

There was good news and bad news in the first quarter for the company's hepatitis B vaccine Heplisav-B. The bad news was that sales fell 21% year over year to $8.3 million due to reduced utilization stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. The good news was that the market share for Heplisav-B in targeted accounts jumped to 27% from 21% in the prior-year period. 

As you might expect with increased manufacturing costs for Cpg 1018, Dynavax's spending rose quite a bit in the  first quarter of 2021, compared to the same period in 2020. However, total operating expenses didn't grow nearly as fast as revenue did, leading to the company's impressive bottom-line improvement.


Dynavax CEO Ryan Spencer said that the company "believe[s] 2021 will be a transformational year." That could very well be the case.

The biotech's collaboration partners should report clinical results throughout 2021. CpG 1018 could prove to be a growth driver not just this year but well into the future. It's being used as an adjuvant not only for COVID-19 vaccines, but also for pertussis and flu vaccines.

Heplisav-B appears to be on track to become the standard of care for hepatitis B vaccination in the U.S. Dynavax also plans to launch the vaccine in Europe in the fourth quarter. 

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/05/07/how-dynavax-demolished-expectations-with-its-q1-re/

Why Quidel Jumped

 Shares of Quidel Corporation (NASDAQ:QDEL) jumped on Friday morning after the company reported blistering-hot growth for the first quarter of 2021. The company didn't quite hit expectations for the quarter. But the stock was down over 65% from 52-week highs going into the Q1 earnings release, providing a depressed price per share to bounce higher from. As of 1:20 p.m. EST, Quidel stock was up 12%.

 

It seems almost every metric was up triple digits for Quidel in Q1. Total revenue was up 115% year over year to $375 million, as its test kits for the coronavirus are still in high demand. In fact, these COVID-19 test kits accounted for almost 75% of revenue in Q1. This surge in sales created operating leverage resulting in a whopping $585 million in operating cash flow for the quarter. For perspective, this stock has a market cap just barely over $5 billion.

When examining Quidel stock using backwards-looking valuation metrics, it's undeniably cheap. Yet, at least some analysts think it could go down further even though it's already down around 60% from previous highs. For example, following the Q1 report, an analyst with J.P. Morgan lowered their price target for Quidel stock from $95 per share to $90 per share, according to The Fly. That's roughly 25% more downside from where the stock trades right now.

Why isn't the market gobbling up shares of this value stock? The simple answer is investors have no idea what to expect in 2021. Management isn't giving guidance because there's so many unknowns right now. In fact, while handling the subject of future revenue on the Q1 conference call, CEO Douglas Bryant said, "it's not forecastable."

Therefore, Quidel stock remains cheap while investors worry about potential shortcomings in 2021. However, the company has approval for at-home test kits, is partnering with businesses to get employees back to the office, and could even support things like sporting events in stadiums as our world returns to normal. Therefore, there's plenty of potential revenue drivers in the coming year, even if these catalysts aren't forecastable right now. 

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/05/07/why-quidel-stock-jumped-today/

y-mAbs upped to Buy by B of A

 From Neutral

https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=YMAB