Skip to main content
Preview

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

Radar
VTRS

VTRS Research brief

Viatris

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$19.04(−0.86%)

Sagehood’s view on VTRS

Viatris · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

52Neutral50 is balancedScore change −1 since 2026-10-29, from 53 to 52; view unchanged at Neutral. Compare the two recordsConfidence 55 · 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

In Sagehood30 · book 2026-10-30

Dated research brief

WhyThe neutral view is driven by a −0.6% operating margin against the 17.1% sector median and net debt to EBITDA of 4.59, offset by a 74.0% one-year price channel. The unresolved risk is earnings in 6 days with volatility rising to 27.4%.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the neutral stance is the intact uptrend: price sits 20.9% above 200-day average and 9.1% above 50-day average, with a 74.0% one-year channel and a 284-day golden cross. 14-week RSI 67.1 confirms momentum.
Break conditionFrom the financial specialist: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.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
$5.80
Base
$15.70
Bull
$35.10

Base case −18% vs. the 2026-10-30 close, on fundamentals to 2026-06-30. Peer-implied median $43.90 from 2 peer-median multiples. Estimates from this research’s valuation model, not a price target.

Against peers

Health Care
MultipleVTRSGroup medianPercentile
P/S1.52×3.15×0th
P/B1.57×3.99×0th
FCF yield8.74%5.36%100th
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 financial 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$19.04 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day−0.86%
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 run53 on 2026-10-29 → 52 on 2026-10-30 (−1 point). 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: BMY, BSX, MDT, MRK, MRNA, PFE. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range shows the peer-implied median from 2 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 $19.04

+19.3% from 2026-06-25

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

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

Selected 2026-10-30. VTRS adjusted close. Continuous series. $19.04 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
2026-10-3052Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2953Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2854Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2754Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2650Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2350Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2255Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2152Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-1650Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-0952Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-0752Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-0252Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-0152Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-3051Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-2951Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-2851Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-2550Neutral57Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective51Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-2351Neutral62Method 4
2026-09-1852Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective50Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective50Neutral58Method 4
2026-09-0450Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective52Neutral65Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective51Neutral70Method 3
2026-08-2853Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective53Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective52Neutral70Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective51Neutral70Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective51Neutral70Method 3
2026-08-1456Neutral70Method 2
2026-08-1354Neutral70Method 1
2026-08-0754Neutral60Method 1
2026-08-0653Neutral60Method 1
2026-08-0459Neutral60Method 1
2026-07-3155Neutral60Method 1
2026-07-2357Neutral56Method 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

VTRS research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Bearish

Viatris earns almost nothing at the operating line, with a −0.6% trailing-twelve-month operating margin versus the 17.1% sector operating-margin median, and net debt to EBITDA of 4.59 against the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median; $1,955 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow is the main support.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue was $14,694 million with 4.5% growth and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $1,955 million, but trailing-twelve-month operating margin was −0.6% against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA was 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median.

Why it matters now

A −0.6% trailing-twelve-month operating margin against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA of 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median imply the business is not earning its cost of capital, so the $1,955 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow is doing little more than servicing leverage.

What could change the view

Countercase: If the operating-margin swing reflects a one-time charge rather than a durable trend, the weak-quality read is wrong; the missing free-cash-flow conversion figure leaves cash quality unquantified. Falsifier: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
38
Evidence confidence
55
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
7.15
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.13
Weighted contribution
5.12
Business driver
Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $14,694 million with 4.5% growth and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $1,955 million, but trailing-twelve-month operating margin was −0.6% against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA was 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median.
Mechanism
A −0.6% trailing-twelve-month operating margin against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA of 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median imply the business is not earning its cost of capital, so the $1,955 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow is doing little more than servicing leverage.
Countercase
If the operating-margin swing reflects a one-time charge rather than a durable trend, the weak-quality read is wrong; the missing free-cash-flow conversion figure leaves cash quality unquantified.
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

Bearish

Score
38
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
5.12

Risk specialist

Bearish

Score
38
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
4.01

Sector specialist

Bearish

Score
44
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.12
Weighted contribution
5.14

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.03
Weighted contribution
1.55

News specialist

Neutral

Score
55
Evidence confidence
50
Weight in the score
0.10
Weighted contribution
5.70

Price-trend specialist

Bullish

Score
72
Evidence confidence
75
Weight in the score
0.28
Weighted contribution
20.34

Valuation specialist

Bearish

Score
35
Evidence confidence
45
Weight in the score
0.14
Weighted contribution
4.75

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
54
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.88

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

VTRS: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

52

Neutral50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Financial specialist

Bearish

Specialist score 38Evidence confidence 55
What the specialist sees

Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $14,694 million with 4.5% growth and trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $1,955 million, but trailing-twelve-month operating margin was −0.6% against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA was 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median.

Why it matters

A −0.6% trailing-twelve-month operating margin against the 17.1% sector operating-margin median and net debt to EBITDA of 4.59 versus the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median imply the business is not earning its cost of capital, so the $1,955 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow is doing little more than servicing leverage.

What argues against it

If the operating-margin swing reflects a one-time charge rather than a durable trend, the weak-quality read is wrong; the missing free-cash-flow conversion figure leaves cash quality unquantified.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 51.48. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +0.52. 53 on 2026-10-29 → 52 on 2026-10-30 (−1 point). 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. Financial specialist

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

  2. Price-trend specialist

    Close 19.04 is 20.9% above 200-day average and 9.1% above 50-day average, with the 1-year channel slope at 74.0% per year and the 90-day slope at 37.4% per year; the golden cross is 284 days old.

  3. Risk specialist

    VTRS shows days to earnings 6, twenty-day annualized volatility 27.4% above sixty-day annualized volatility 23.2% with a rising volatility trend, drawdown from the one-year high −0.9% versus maximum one-year drawdown −19.0%, one-year large daily-move count 15, and twenty-day average dollar volume $157.1 million at volatility percentile within the universe 2.

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 net debt to EBITDA at or below the 1.33 sector net-debt-to-EBITDA median would break the leverage claim.

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

VTRS: 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 $19.04 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-06-30.

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

Bear
$5.80−69% vs close
Base
$15.70−18% vs close
Bull
$35.10+84% vs close

Implied by the median of 2 peer-median multiples: $43.90 (+130.6% 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: BMY, BSX, MDT, MRK, MRNA, PFE.

Multiples against the peer group

Health Care · 6 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)Not computed in this research

    Peer median 23.78× · middle half 17.00× to 40.16×

  • Price to sales1.52×

    Peer median 3.15× · middle half 2.81× to 4.99× · 0th percentile of the group

  • Price to book1.57×

    Peer median 3.99× · middle half 2.48× to 7.97× · 0th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield8.74%

    Peer median 5.36% · middle half 4.5% to 6.16% · 100th 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: 3 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple.

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.

Viatris (VTRS) research | Sagehood