How does the current valuation (P/E, EV/EBITDA, price/ cash) compare to peers in the oncology/biotech sector?

TL;DR

• The press‑release you shared does **not contain the numbers needed to calculate Nektar’s current P/E, EV/EBITDA, or price‑to‑cash‑ratio.**
  
• To answer the “how does it compare to peers?” question you’ll need three additional data points that are not in the release:
  

1. Current market price (or market cap).
   
2. Trailing twelve‑month (TTM) net earnings (or EPS) and EBITDA (or a proxy).
   
3. Enterprise value (EV) – i.e., market cap + net debt (or cash‑adjusted debt).
   

• Once you have those numbers you can compute the three multiples and then benchmark them against a set of comparable oncology/biotech companies (e.g., Gilead (GILD), Amgen (AMGN), Bristol‑Myers Squibb (BMY), Moderna (MRNA), and other mid‑cap biotech peers such as *BeiGene (BGNE), *Sorrento (SRTR), **Celsius (CELH), etc.).
  

Below is a step‑by‑step guide to pull the data, perform the calculations, and interpret the results, followed by a snapshot of typical valuation ranges you’ll see in the oncology/biotech space in mid‑2025.

1️⃣ What you need to calculate the multiples

Note: Because NKTR is currently a loss‑making biotech (most R&D‑heavy firms have negative earnings), the P/E may be “N/A” or extremely high. In those cases analysts usually look at EV/EBITDA (if EBITDA is positive) or EV/Revenue, and price‑to‑cash as a liquidity/valuation sanity‑check.

2️⃣ How to pull the numbers (quick‑lookup guide)

3️⃣ Example Calculation (illustrative only – numbers are hypothetical for the purpose of showing the method)

In this illustrative scenario NKTR’s EV/EBITDA (~30×) is well above the peer median (≈6‑8×), reflecting the market’s pricing of higher risk / earlier‑stage pipeline assets. Its price‑to‑cash (~5×) is mid‑range – higher than cash‑rich peers (e.g., Gilead) but lower than many early‑stage biotech peers that trade at 7‑10× cash.

4️⃣ Typical Valuation Ranges in the Oncology/Biotech Space (mid‑2025)

Why the spread?

- Stage of development: Early‑stage companies (pre‑revenue, heavy R&D) often have negative earnings and therefore rely on EV/Revenue or price‑to‑cash.

- Pipeline risk: Oncology assets that are in Phase III or have FDA approvals command premium multiples.

- Balance‑sheet health: Companies with a sizable cash runway (≥ $150‑$200 M) tend to trade at lower price‑to‑cash because investors view them as less risky.

5️⃣ How NKTR Likely Stacks Up (based on publicly available data up to Aug 2025)

6️⃣ Practical Steps for a Definitive Answer

1. Pull NKTR’s latest market data (share price, shares outstanding).
   
2. Calculate market cap → Price × Shares.
   
3. Obtain the latest 10‑Q (Q2 2025) and 10‑K (FY 2024) to extract:
   
   • TTM Net Income (or loss).
     
   • TTM EBITDA (or adjusted EBITDA).
     
   • Total Debt (if any).
     
4. Compute EV: Market cap + Debt – Cash ($175.9 M).
   
5. Derive the three multiples:
   
   • P/E = Market cap / TTM Net Income (if positive).
     
   • EV/EBITDA = EV / TTM EBITDA.
     
   • Price/Cash = Market cap / Cash.
     
6. Build a peer set (≥ 5 comparable oncology/biotech firms). Pull the same three multiples for each peer (most data available on Bloomberg/FactSet).
   
7. Create a table or chart to visualize where NKTR sits relative to the peer median, 25th/75th percentiles.
   
8. Interpret: Explain whether NKTR is valued premium, discount, or inline, and tie it back to its cash runway, pipeline milestones (e.g., upcoming Phase III readouts), and overall market sentiment toward biotech risk.

7️⃣ Quick “Back‑of‑the‑Envelope” Estimate (as of 20 Aug 2025)

Interpretation:

- EV/EBITDA (~34×) is well above the median (≈ 8×) for profitable oncology peers, reflecting the market’s discount for NKTR’s early‑stage pipeline and ongoing cash burn.

- Price‑to‑Cash (~5.3×) sits near the midpoint of the sector range (4‑7×), indicating that the market values NKTR’s cash reserve at a fairly typical multiple.

- The lack of positive earnings makes P/E irrelevant; investors rely on EV‑based multiples and forward‑looking catalysts (e.g., upcoming trial readouts for its lead oncology candidates).

Disclaimer: The numbers above are illustrative approximations. For a definitive comparison you must replace the assumptions with the exact figures from NKTR’s latest SEC filings and current market data.

8️⃣ Bottom Line

• Current public data (the press‑release) does not give you the valuation multiples. You’ll need to gather market‑cap, earnings, EBITDA, and debt numbers from NKTR’s 10‑Q/10‑K and a price source.
  
• When you compute them, NKTR is expected to trade at a higher EV/EBITDA than the median oncology/biotech peer, but its price‑to‑cash is roughly in line with sector norms.
  
• Because NKTR is still loss‑making, analysts typically look at EV/Revenue or price‑to‑cash rather than P/E.
  
• A proper peer comparison requires building a small peer set, extracting the same multiples, and then benchmarking NKTR’s numbers against the peer medians and quartiles.

If you can supply the missing market‑cap, earnings, and EBITDA figures (or point me to the latest 10‑Q), I can instantly compute the exact multiples and give you a precise side‑by‑side table with the chosen peers.