Logo

CRSP

CRISPR Therapeutics AG

CRSP

CRISPR Therapeutics AG NASDAQ
$53.45 0.29% (+0.15)

Market Cap $4.68 B
52w High $78.48
52w Low $30.04
Dividend Yield 0%
P/E -9.65
Volume 1.40M
Outstanding Shares 87.53M

Income Statement

Period Revenue Operating Expense Net Income Net Profit Margin Earnings Per Share EBITDA
Q3-2025 $889K $68.255M $-106.441M -11.973K% $-1.17 $-101.389M
Q2-2025 $0 $184.171M $-208.549M 0% $-2.4 $-224.675M
Q1-2025 $865K $91.78M $-135.996M -15.722K% $-1.58 $-143.688M
Q4-2024 $35M $99.588M $-37.311M -106.603% $-0.44 $-59.746M
Q3-2024 $0 $98.977M $-85.942M 0% $-1.01 $-105.391M

Balance Statement

Period Cash & Short-term Total Assets Total Liabilities Total Equity
Q3-2025 $1.916B $2.245B $329.326M $1.916B
Q2-2025 $1.725B $2.03B $318.586M $1.711B
Q1-2025 $1.855B $2.166B $336.942M $1.829B
Q4-2024 $1.904B $2.242B $309.954M $1.932B
Q3-2024 $1.936B $2.256B $316.472M $1.94B

Cash Flow Statement

Period Net Income Cash From Operations Cash From Investing Cash From Financing Net Change Free Cash Flow
Q3-2025 $-106.441M $-84.634M $-119.226M $296.766M $92.879M $-84.708M
Q2-2025 $-208.549M $-113.88M $69.977M $2.258M $-41.565M $-113.997M
Q1-2025 $-135.996M $-53.947M $-19.755M $10.588M $-63.073M $-54.153M
Q4-2024 $-37.311M $-50.031M $105.828M $16.876M $72.586M $-50.285M
Q3-2024 $-85.942M $-106.913M $-161.604M $9.64M $-258.802M $-107.132M

Revenue by Products

Product Q4-2024Q1-2025Q2-2025Q3-2025
Grant
Grant
$0 $0 $0 $0

Five-Year Company Overview

Income Statement

Income Statement CRISPR Therapeutics is still very much a research‑driven company, not yet a steady revenue business. Its sales have been lumpy and largely tied to collaboration and milestone payments rather than recurring product revenue. The one standout year of profit a few years ago was driven by a large one‑time boost, not by a mature commercial engine. Outside of that, the company has consistently reported operating and net losses as it spends heavily on science, clinical trials, and building out its platform. Losses have narrowed at times but remain meaningful, and the most recent year shows only minimal revenue with continued negative earnings. Financially, this still looks like an early‑stage biotech transitioning from “all R&D” toward commercialization, but not yet at scale.


Balance Sheet

Balance Sheet The balance sheet is a relative strength. The company holds a sizable pool of cash and investments, with total assets comfortably above its liabilities. Debt is modest compared with the overall size of the business, and shareholders’ equity is solidly positive, indicating no over‑leveraging. Cash balances have come down from earlier peaks as the company funds its pipeline, but they still provide a multi‑year cushion under current spending patterns. Overall, the balance sheet looks built to support ongoing R&D and multiple clinical programs without immediate pressure to raise capital, though that could change if spending ramps faster than expected or commercialization is slower than hoped.


Cash Flow

Cash Flow Cash flow reflects the classic profile of a biotech in build‑out mode. Most years show negative operating cash flow, meaning the company is consistently using cash to fund research, trials, and organizational growth. There was one year of positive operating and free cash flow tied to a major partner payment, but that appears more like a one‑off event than a new normal. Capital spending needs are relatively light, so the main cash drain is day‑to‑day operations and development work. Free cash flow has therefore been negative in most periods, but the burn rate has not been extreme given the scale of the pipeline, and the existing cash pile helps buffer this ongoing outflow.


Competitive Edge

Competitive Edge Competitively, CRISPR Therapeutics holds a privileged position in a cutting‑edge niche. It is one of the earliest and most prominent developers of CRISPR/Cas9‑based therapies, backed by a Nobel Prize‑winning scientific founder and a strong patent estate. The approval of its first CRISPR‑based therapy, co‑developed with Vertex, gives it real‑world validation, brand recognition, and experience in manufacturing and regulation that many peers still lack. The Vertex partnership adds commercial muscle and global reach. At the same time, gene editing and cell therapy are crowded and fast‑moving fields, with multiple well‑funded rivals pursuing similar targets. Regulatory scrutiny, safety concerns, pricing debates, and heavy reliance on a small number of initial programs are ongoing competitive and strategic risks.


Innovation and R&D

Innovation and R&D Innovation is the core of this company’s story. CRISPR Therapeutics is working across several fronts: ex vivo therapies like its approved blood‑disorder treatment; allogeneic “off‑the‑shelf” CAR‑T programs for cancer and potentially autoimmune disease; in vivo liver‑targeted programs for cardiovascular risk factors; and regenerative approaches for conditions like type 1 diabetes. It is also exploring newer editing tools and improved delivery systems to make gene editing more precise and widely applicable. This breadth gives multiple shots on goal and potential for platform effects, but it also means high R&D spending, complex execution, and significant scientific and clinical risk. Many programs are still in early or mid‑stage trials, so outcomes remain uncertain and timelines can shift as data emerge.


Summary

CRISPR Therapeutics today is best viewed as a high‑innovation, high‑uncertainty biotech in transition. On the financial side, it remains loss‑making with negative cash flow, but it is supported by a strong balance sheet and modest debt, giving it time to pursue its ambitions. On the strategic side, it has achieved a landmark first approval, enjoys a deep partnership with a seasoned commercial player, and holds a respected position in one of the most promising areas of modern medicine. The key questions from here center on execution: how quickly and successfully CASGEVY is rolled out worldwide, whether later‑stage programs can reproduce strong clinical results, and how regulators, payers, and physicians respond to this new class of therapies. The upside potential is significant if multiple programs succeed, but so are the risks if clinical data disappoint, safety issues appear, or adoption is slower than anticipated.