Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
BMY

BMY Research brief

Bristol Myers Squibb

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$62.48(+1.78%)

Sagehood’s view on BMY

Bristol Myers Squibb · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

58Neutral50 is balancedScore unchanged since 2026-10-29 at 58; view unchanged at Neutral. Compare the two recordsConfidence 62 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

Dated research brief

WhyBristol Myers Squibb's neutral case is driven by valuation, since the $88.30 base fair value sits 41% above the $62.48 close. The unresolved risk is 4.2% revenue growth trailing the 4.6% sector median while debt stays at $42,617 million.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the neutral view is the balance sheet.
Break conditionFrom the valuation specialist: A later reading showing the own P/E above the 60.02 peer Q3 median would break the cheap read, since the peer median already sits above the close.Tests that specialist’s reading, not this page’s whole Neutral view.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

Close vs. model fair value · discounted cash flow

Bear
$45.00
Base
$88.30
Bull
$153.10

Base case +41% vs. the 2026-10-30 close, on fundamentals to 2026-09-30. Peer-implied median $76.99 from 3 peer-median multiples. Estimates from this research’s valuation model, not a price target.

Against peers

Health Care
MultipleBMYGroup medianPercentile
P/E (TTM)13.85×31.97×0th
P/S2.56×3.15×17th
P/B5.46×2.50×67th
FCF yield7.26%5.36%83rd
Score details & research limitations9 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

Where the break condition comes from: Sagehood research took this condition from the valuation specialist. It tests that specialist’s own reading, so it does not say everything that would change this page’s Neutral view.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$62.48 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day+1.78%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage8 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 2 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 8 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run58 on 2026-10-29 → 58 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Filing cited in the evidenceNot recorded on this card. The newest filing on record is under Key financials, and recent filings are listed under SEC filings.
Peer set6 names in Health Care: BSX, MDT, MRK, MRNA, PFE, VTRS. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range shows the peer-implied median from 3 peer-median multiples.

Not in this run: Company profile date and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

9 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $62.48

+15.3% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

BMY adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. BMY adjusted close. Continuous series. $62.48 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-07-23 to 2026-10-30 · 37 publications

Each point is a verified published score. The line breaks where the research method changed (4 methods, numbered in the order they were first used), so scores are not joined across methods. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3058Neutral62Method 4
2026-10-2958Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-2855Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2755Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-2655Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-2353Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-2256Neutral62Method 4
2026-10-2158Neutral62Method 4
2026-10-1658Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-0955Neutral62Method 4
2026-10-0760Neutral60Method 4
2026-10-0260Neutral65Method 4
2026-10-0157Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-3062Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-2960Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-2859Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-2560Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective62Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-2362Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-1862Neutral68Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective60Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective57Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-0465Bullish65Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective65Bullish70Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective62Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-2862Neutral62Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective62Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective63Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective62Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective61Neutral63Method 3
2026-08-1461Neutral63Method 2
2026-08-1361Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0762Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0662Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0463Neutral63Method 1
2026-07-3159Neutral82Method 1
2026-07-2365Bullish57Method 1

Specialists

8 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

2 unavailable

BMY research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Neutral

Bristol Myers Squibb is a cash-generative but slow-growing pharmaceutical: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $50,034 million grew 4.2%, slightly below the 4.6% sector revenue-growth median, while trailing-twelve-month free cash flow of $9,286 million converted at 1.0 and net income margin was 18.5%.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $50,034 million grew 4.2% versus the 4.6% sector revenue-growth median, quarterly revenue growth accelerated from 1.3% to 6.9%, trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $9,286 million with free-cash-flow conversion of 1.0, and total debt was $42,617 million against $9,574 million of cash.

Why it matters now

Full cash conversion and an 18.5% net margin show the patent-protected portfolio still monetizes well, but revenue growth at the sector median and a $42,617 million debt load against $9,574 million of cash mean the balance sheet limits flexibility if the pipeline disappoints.

What could change the view

Countercase: The read would be wrong if the accelerating quarterly growth reflects durable new-product launches rather than rebate timing, and the missing net-debt-to-EBITDA and interest-coverage figures leave leverage quality unassessed. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth below the 4.6% sector revenue-growth median would break the steady-growth claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
58
Evidence confidence
70
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
9.10
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.17
Weighted contribution
9.63
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.17
Weighted contribution
9.63

Risk specialist

Neutral

Score
47
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.25

Sector specialist

Bearish

Score
40
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.10
Weighted contribution
4.01

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.03
Weighted contribution
1.50

News specialist

Neutral

Score
62
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.12
Weighted contribution
7.71

Price-trend specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.22
Weighted contribution
12.69

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Score
55
Evidence confidence
65
Weight in the score
0.19
Weighted contribution
10.43

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
55
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.08
Weighted contribution
4.41

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

BMY: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

58

Neutral50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Specialist score 55Evidence confidence 65
What the specialist sees

The base case pairs 1.9% revenue growth with an 18.6% FCF margin for an $88.30 fair value, 41% above the $62.48 close, while the bear case at −5% growth and a 14.6% margin still reaches $45.00, 28% below it.

Why it matters

If the 6.84% WACC and 18.6% FCF margin hold, the shares trade below the grid's base case and below the peer-implied $76.99 median, so the value case rests on the discount rate staying near its current level.

What argues against it

The read would be wrong if the 6.84% WACC rises toward the 7.84% sensitivity, which cuts the base fair value to $68.82 and narrows the upside to about 10%.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing the own P/E above the 60.02 peer Q3 median would break the cheap read, since the peer median already sits above the close.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 54.65. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +3.35. 58 on 2026-10-29 → 58 on 2026-10-30 (0 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Valuation specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Financial specialist

    Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $50,034 million grew 4.2% versus the 4.6% sector revenue-growth median, quarterly revenue growth accelerated from 1.3% to 6.9%, trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $9,286 million with free-cash-flow conversion of 1.0, and total debt was $42,617 million against $9,574 million of cash.

  3. News specialist

    material-news net tone was 0.2 with good-news days followed by outperformance 7 against bad-news days followed by underperformance 3, and the 2026-10-29 guidance item showed one-day return relative to SPY of 1.74 while the 2026-10-30 management item showed one-day return relative to SPY of 3.55.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

A later reading showing the own P/E above the 60.02 peer Q3 median would break the cheap read, since the peer median already sits above the close.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

BMY: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Valuation the research computed

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $62.48 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-09-30.

Fair value by discounted cash flow, at the cells this run nominated.

Bear
$45.00−28% vs close
Base
$88.30+41% vs close
Bull
$153.10+145% vs close

Implied by the median of 3 peer-median multiples: $76.99 (+23.2% vs close)

Peers: the 6 Liquid 100 names in Health Care that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: BSX, MDT, MRK, MRNA, PFE, VTRS.

Multiples against the peer group

Health Care · 6 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)13.85×

    Peer median 31.97× · middle half 22.09× to 60.02× · 0th percentile of the group

  • Price to sales2.56×

    Peer median 3.15× · middle half 2.81× to 4.99× · 17th percentile of the group

  • Price to book5.46×

    Peer median 2.50× · middle half 2.15× to 7.24× · 67th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield7.26%

    Peer median 5.36% · middle half 4.5% to 6.16% · 83rd percentile of the group

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: 12 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; no full-year gross-profit line was filed; no full-year operating income was filed; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple; the measured beta of 0.20 was below the floor used for the cost of equity, so the floor was applied instead.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

Bristol Myers Squibb (BMY) research | Sagehood