LLY trades against a final fair-value range of $1,025.31-$1,935.83, with the midpoint set by the accepted valuation synthesis rather than earlier draft model outputs. Fair value range: low $1025, high $1936, with mid-point at $1466.
Stock analysis
Eli Lilly and CompanyLLY Eli Lilly and Company fair value $1,466–$1,936
Englische Quelle wird angezeigt, während wir übersetzen
Dieser Bericht wurde noch nicht übersetzt. Aktualisieren Sie in ein paar Minuten, sobald die Übersetzungswarteschlange aufgeholt hat.
§1 Zusammenfassung
Composite fair value $1,466 with high case $1,936.
Implied upside of 50.3% to fair value.
Moat 9/10 · confidence 88/100 · Hyper-growth.
Trades below fair value with a meaningful cushion to the midpoint.
Fair value
$1,466
Margin of safety
+33.5%
Confidence
88/100
Moat
9/10
Educational analysis only — not financial advice. Always do your own due diligence.
$974.96Price
FV $1,465.75
High $1,935.83
LLY trades against a final fair-value range of $1,025.31-$1,935.83, with the midpoint set by the accepted valuation synthesis rather than earlier draft model outputs.
Intangible assets
Extensive patent protection on core GLP-1 portfolio.
Switching costs
High clinical inertia and patient reliance on established dosing.
Bull thesis
The $1,465.75 fair value bridges the benchmark gap by correctly weighting forward EPS to capture explicit pipeline momentum.
§2 Bärenszenario
A severe margin compression event driven by aggressive competitor pricing, early regulatory intervention in obesity treatments, and slower-than-expected capacity expansion. This scenario forces reliance on slower-growth legacy assets.
Wie diese These scheitern kann
Severe Pricing Regulation
· Medium
Medicare aggressively negotiates GLP-1 pricing, capping margins and triggering cascading price cuts across commercial channels.
FV impact
Down to Floor Model ($741.88)
Trigger
1-3 Years
Long-Term Safety Signal
· Low
Unforeseen long-term adverse cardiovascular or gastrointestinal events associated with chronic Mounjaro/Zepbound use surface.
FV impact
Severe multiple contraction
Trigger
3-5 Years
Oral Competitor Domination
· Low
Next-generation oral obesity treatments from competitors demonstrate superior efficacy and tolerability, obliterating the injectable market.
FV impact
Reduces long-term growth to low single digits
Trigger
5+ Years
Frühwarnsignale zur Überwachung
Kennzahl
Aktuell
Auslöseschwelle
Sequential decline in new prescriptions for Zepbound.
Monitor
Deterioration versus the report thesis
Gross margin falling below 70% due to persistent scale-up costs.
Monitor
Deterioration versus the report thesis
CapEx-to-Revenue ratio remaining above 15% without commensurate revenue inflection.
Monitor
Deterioration versus the report thesis
PBMs securing steeper rebates, compressing net realized pricing.
Monitor
Deterioration versus the report thesis
Delay in oral GLP-1 pipeline readouts.
Monitor
Deterioration versus the report thesis
§3 Finanzielle Historie
Gewinn- und Verlustrechnung — letzte sechs Perioden
Position
T−0
T−1
T−2
T−3
T−4
CAGR
Periode
2021-12-31
2022-12-31
2023-12-31
2024-12-31
2025-12-31
Trend
Umsatz
$28.32B
$28.54B
$34.12B
$45.04B
$65.18B
+23.2%
Bruttogewinn
$21.01B
$21.91B
$27.04B
$36.63B
$54.13B
+26.7%
Betriebsergebnis
$6.36B
$8.28B
$10.33B
$17.04B
$29.70B
+47.0%
Nettogewinn
$5.58B
$6.24B
$5.24B
$10.59B
$20.64B
+38.7%
EPS (verwässert)
$6.14
$6.57
$5.80
$11.71
$22.95
+39.0%
EBITDA
$7.90B
$8.66B
$11.85B
$18.81B
$31.69B
+41.5%
F&E
$7.90B
$7.19B
$9.31B
$10.99B
$13.34B
+14.0%
VVG
$6.43B
$6.44B
$7.40B
$8.59B
$11.09B
+14.6%
Qualitäts-Scores
Piotroski F-Score
7 / 9
0–9 Qualitätskomposit
Altman Z-Score
7.39
Insolvenzrisiko (>3 sicher)
Beneish M-Score
-1.85
Risiko von Ergebnismanipulation
OCF / Nettogewinn
0.82×
>1 weist auf hohe Ergebnisqualität hin
Bilanzqualitätsschwelle
Pass
Sektoradjustierte Schwelle
ROIC
34.0%
Rendite auf eingesetztes Kapital
Abschnitt 3
Numbers analysis
Cashflow
Cash-flow quality is reflected in the OCF / net income, accounting-quality, and ROIC rows above.
Kapitalallokation
Capital allocation should be evaluated against reinvestment needs, balance-sheet strength, and shareholder returns.
Einzelabonnenten — ab §411 weitere Abschnitte
Vollständige Analyse lesen — 11 weitere Abschnitte.
Competitive moat, industry cycle, peer comparison, intrinsic valuation, sensitivity, scenarios, earnings decision tree, position management, investor perspectives, scorecard, and final recommendation.
Vollständiger Bericht für jeden abgedeckten Ticker
Based on our latest independent analysis, LLY looks meaningfully undervalued. The current price is $975 versus a composite fair-value midpoint of $1466 (range $1025–$1936), which implies roughly 50.3% upside to the midpoint.
Our composite fair-value range for LLY is $1025–$1936, with a midpoint of $1466. The range is triangulated across multiple valuation models (discounted earnings, forward earnings scenarios, peer multiples, and where applicable owner earnings or reverse DCF) and weighted by reliability for Eli Lilly and Company's archetype.
Our current rating for LLY is Strong Buy with a confidence score of 88/100. LLY is rated Strong Buy at $974.96 versus the reconciled fair value midpoint of $1,465.75, implying +50.34% upside/downside. Confidence is separately disclosed at 88/100. This is independent research for educational purposes, not personalized investment advice.
The top risks our latest report flags for Eli Lilly and Company are: Severe Pricing Regulation; Long-Term Safety Signal; Oral Competitor Domination. The single biggest risk is Severe Pricing Regulation: Medicare aggressively negotiates GLP-1 pricing, capping margins and triggering cascading price cuts across commercial channels.
Our current rating for LLY is Strong Buy, issued with a confidence score of 88/100 and a moat score of 9/10. The rating reflects the composite fair-value range ($1025–$1936) versus the current price of $975.
Eli Lilly and Company is classified as a hyper-growth stock. Archetype determines how every downstream parameter — discount rate, terminal growth, deceleration curve, terminal multiple, scenario probability weights, scorecard weights, and which valuation models are prioritized — is calibrated for LLY.
