Logo

PEPG

PepGen Inc.

PEPG

PepGen Inc. NASDAQ
$6.45 5.83% (+0.35)

Market Cap $443.02 M
52w High $6.85
52w Low $0.88
Dividend Yield 0%
P/E -2.29
Volume 918.92K
Outstanding Shares 68.74M

Income Statement

Period Revenue Operating Expense Net Income Net Profit Margin Earnings Per Share EBITDA
Q3-2025 $0 $18.315M $-18.026M 0% $0.55 $-17.687M
Q2-2025 $0 $23.932M $-23.087M 0% $-0.7 $-22.661M
Q1-2025 $0 $31.321M $-30.202M 0% $-0.92 $-29.996M
Q4-2024 $0 $23.965M $-22.242M 0% $-0.68 $-22.479M
Q3-2024 $0 $23.171M $-21.384M 0% $-0.66 $-21.855M

Balance Statement

Period Cash & Short-term Total Assets Total Liabilities Total Equity
Q3-2025 $163.665M $190.057M $26.917M $163.14M
Q2-2025 $74.653M $102.242M $31.084M $71.158M
Q1-2025 $97.781M $127.393M $35.588M $91.805M
Q4-2024 $120.191M $150.883M $32.263M $118.62M
Q3-2024 $138.857M $170.234M $32.779M $137.455M

Cash Flow Statement

Period Net Income Cash From Operations Cash From Investing Cash From Financing Net Change Free Cash Flow
Q3-2025 $-18.026M $-19.259M $18.903M $108.052M $107.703M $-19.356M
Q2-2025 $-23.087M $-23.601M $14.957M $98K $-8.561M $-23.644M
Q1-2025 $-30.202M $-22.93M $17.149M $0 $-5.788M $-23.055M
Q4-2024 $-22.242M $-19.475M $26.501M $128K $7.132M $-19.703M
Q3-2024 $-21.384M $-24.012M $-133K $327K $-23.796M $-24.197M

Five-Year Company Overview

Income Statement

Income Statement PepGen is still a pure research-stage biotech: it has no product sales yet, and all activity flows through research and development and overhead expenses. The company has reported steady losses each year, which is typical for a small clinical-stage firm building out a new drug platform. The size of these losses is meaningful but not extreme for the sector, and the per‑share loss has been easing recently, suggesting some cost discipline and a relatively controlled spending ramp. Financially, the income statement tells a clear story: the business is entirely dependent on future clinical success and eventual approvals to ever generate revenue, so current results mainly reflect investment in science rather than commercial performance.


Balance Sheet

Balance Sheet The balance sheet shows a small, lean company with most of its value concentrated in cash and research assets. Cash remains the dominant asset, though it has stepped down from earlier levels as the company funds its trials. Debt is modest, so the capital structure is mostly equity‑financed, which reduces interest burden but leaves shareholders bearing the bulk of the risk. Equity is still positive, meaning assets exceed liabilities, but it has been gradually eroded by ongoing losses. Overall, the balance sheet looks clean and uncomplicated, but also clearly finite: the company has resources to keep working, yet not a fortress‑like cushion.


Cash Flow

Cash Flow Cash flows reflect the classic profile of a pre‑revenue biotech: money consistently goes out the door to fund operations, with nothing coming in from product sales. Operating cash outflows have been steady and predictable, tracking the company’s clinical and research activities. There is essentially no spending on heavy equipment or facilities, so free cash flow closely mirrors operating cash burn. This pattern underscores that PepGen’s main resource is cash, and its main use of cash is advancing its pipeline. Over time, the key question is how long the current cash can support the planned trials before additional funding is needed.


Competitive Edge

Competitive Edge PepGen’s competitive position rests almost entirely on the promise of its Enhanced Delivery Oligonucleotide (EDO) platform and its lead program in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1). The platform is designed to solve a key bottleneck in genetic medicines: actually getting oligonucleotide drugs into the right cells and into the cell nucleus efficiently and safely. Early data suggest strong target engagement and a favorable safety profile, which, if confirmed in larger studies, could set the company apart from peers. Regulatory advantages like Orphan Drug and Fast Track status, plus growing patent protection, further strengthen its stance. On the other hand, PepGen is small, focused on essentially one main clinical asset after stepping away from Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and faces well‑funded competitors in muscle and neuromuscular gene‑targeted therapies. This creates a “high‑potential, high‑concentration” competitive situation: the upside could be meaningful if the lead program succeeds, but the company is more exposed if it does not.


Innovation and R&D

Innovation and R&D Innovation is clearly PepGen’s core. The EDO platform is a sophisticated attempt to enhance delivery of oligonucleotide drugs, a long‑standing challenge in the field. The DM1 candidate uses a nuanced “blocking” approach to neutralize toxic RNA, aiming to fix mis‑splicing while preserving normal gene function, which differentiates it from some competing strategies. Early clinical data, plus regulatory designations, suggest the science is promising. The company is also exploring a broader set of neuromuscular and neurological diseases in preclinical work, hinting at platform potential beyond DM1. At the same time, R&D is heavily concentrated on this lead program; discontinuing the Duchenne effort shows strategic focus and discipline, but it also means the near‑ and medium‑term story depends heavily on a small number of projects. Future pipeline disclosures and clinical readouts will largely define whether the platform proves to be a broad engine of innovation or remains a narrower, single‑indication play.


Summary

PepGen is an early‑stage, research‑driven biotech: no revenues yet, controlled but ongoing losses, and a straightforward balance sheet dominated by cash and equity. Financially, it behaves like a typical clinical‑stage company, steadily burning cash to advance its pipeline. Strategically, its identity is tied to a single powerful idea—the EDO delivery platform—and one lead drug for DM1 that has shown encouraging early data, regulatory support, and growing intellectual‑property backing. This gives the company a potentially meaningful scientific edge but also concentrates its risk: success or failure of a few clinical programs will have an outsized impact. The main strengths lie in scientific differentiation, early clinical signals, and regulatory and patent support; the main risks lie in clinical uncertainty, eventual funding needs, and competition from other players in genetic medicines. Overall, this is a focused, high‑uncertainty, high‑optionality story that will be shaped over the next several years by trial outcomes and the company’s ability to broaden its pipeline beyond its lead asset.