We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience.
This includes personalizing content and advertising.
By pressing "Accept All" or closing out of this banner, you consent to the use of all cookies and similar technologies and the sharing of information they collect with third parties.
You can reject marketing cookies by pressing "Deny Optional," but we still use essential, performance, and functional cookies.
In addition, whether you "Accept All," Deny Optional," click the X or otherwise continue to use the site, you accept our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service, revised from time to time.
You are being directed to ZacksTrade, a division of LBMZ Securities and licensed broker-dealer. ZacksTrade and Zacks.com are separate companies. The web link between the two companies is not a solicitation or offer to invest in a particular security or type of security. ZacksTrade does not endorse or adopt any particular investment strategy, any analyst opinion/rating/report or any approach to evaluating individual securities.
If you wish to go to ZacksTrade, click OK. If you do not, click Cancel.
BEAM vs. NTLA: Which Gene Editing Stock Holds More Potential?
Read MoreHide Full Article
Key Takeaways
BEAM and NTLA are compared as gene editing biotechs with pipelines at different development stages.
BEAM advances multiple SCD programs and updates its BEAM-101 and BEAM-301 studies across phases.
NTLA pushes late-stage in vivo candidates while a clinical hold on nex-z raises safety concerns.
Beam Therapeutics (BEAM - Free Report) and Intellia Therapeutics (NTLA - Free Report) are clinical-stage companies developing investigational gene therapies. While BEAM’s pipeline candidates are still in early-stage development, NTLA is evaluating two candidates in late-stage development.
But which one makes for a better investment pick today? Let's examine the fundamentals of the two stocks to make a prudent choice.
The Case for BEAM
Beam Therapeutics is one of the few biotechs that has shown immense potential in the gene therapy space. The company’s proprietary base-editing technology potentially enables the development of a differentiated class of precision genetic medicines that target a single base in the genome without making a double-stranded break in the DNA, thereby minimizing errors.
One of the company’s assets developed using the above technology is BEAM-101, an ex vivo therapy being evaluated in the phase I/II BEACON study for sickle cell disease (SCD). Initial safety and efficacy data from this study (announced last December) showed that treatment with BEAM-101 led to a robust and durable increase in fetal hemoglobin and a reduction in sickle hemoglobin. Updated data from this study will be provided at the 2025 ASH annual meeting next month. The FDA recently granted orphan drug and regenerative medicine advanced therapy (RMAT) designations to BEAM-101 in the SCD indication.
BEAM recently initiated dosing in a phase I healthy volunteer study evaluating BEAM-103, an experimental anti-CD117 monoclonal antibody for the treatment of SCD.
Beam is also exploring the potential of in vivo therapies. Unlike ex-vivo therapies, where cells are removed, modified and then inserted back into one’s body, in vivo therapies involve infusing new genes directly into the body. The company is currently developing two such candidates — BEAM-301 and BEAM-302 — for treating glycogen storage disease type 1a (GSD1a) and alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD), respectively, in separate phase I/II studies. While Beam Therapeutics is currently dosing patients in the BEAM-301 study, an update on the BEAM-302 study is expected in early 2026.
The company also has partnerships with pharma giants like Eli Lilly and Pfizer, which provide financial support in the form of collaboration revenues.
Yet, Beam's biggest challenge lies in its lack of an approved product in its portfolio. Since the company’s pipeline is still in early- to mid-stage development, there are still at least a couple of years away from a potential market launch. As a result, the company is highly dependent on its collaboration partners for growth. Any dispute with these partners could be detrimental to Beam’s economic interests and may adversely impact the stock.
The Case for NTLA
While most gene editing biotechs start with an initial focus on ex vivo therapies, Intellia took a different approach by focusing on the more complex in vivo approach. The company is currently advancing two late-stage in vivo candidates — lonvo-z (formerly NTLA-2002) for hereditary angioedema (HAE) and nex-z (formerly NTLA-2001) for transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis.
In September, Intellia completed enrolment in the pivotal phase III HAELO study evaluating lonvo-z as a one-shot therapy to prevent HAE attacks by suppressing the plasma kallikrein activity. Top-line data from this study are expected by mid-2026. If this data is positive, a commercial launch for the therapy is planned by the first half of 2027.
The company’s second candidate, nex-z, is being developed in collaboration with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN - Free Report) . Last month, NTLA suffered a major setback when the FDA placed a clinical hold on two late-stage studies — MAGNITUDE and MAGNITUDE-2 — evaluating this Regeneron-partnered therapy for ATTR amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) and ATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy (ATTRv-PN), respectively.
This hold was placed after a patient in the MAGNITUDE study experienced grade 4 liver transaminase elevations, indicating a notable increase in liver enzymes. As of Nov. 6, Intellia claimed that this adverse effect occurred in less than 1% of all patients enrolled in the MAGNITUDE study. No such events have been reported in the MAGNITUDE-2 study. Although NTLA is actively working with investigators and regulators to understand the issue and develop additional risk-mitigation strategies, it has raised concerns about nex-z’s safety in the long run.
Like Beam, Intellia also lacks a stable revenue stream. To curb cash burn, Intellia started a strategic reorganization at the start of this year focused on prioritizing the development of its late-stage candidates. As part of this initiative, it stopped development of some research programs, including the in vivo gene insertion candidate, NTLA-3001, for AATD-associated lung disease. NTLA is looking to reduce its current workforce by nearly 27% before year-end.
How Do Estimates Compare for BEAM & NTLA?
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for BEAM’s 2025 sales implies a year-over-year decline of nearly 37% while loss estimates per share are expected to improve by 3%. Loss estimates for both 2025 and 2026 have widened over the past 30 days.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
We expect NTLA’s 2025 sales to decline about 4% year over year, while the bottom-line estimates are expected to narrow by nearly 24%. Loss estimates for 2025 and 2026 have narrowed over the past 30 days.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
Price Performance and Valuation of BEAM & NTLA
Year to date, shares of BEAM have gained 1%, while those of NTLA have plummeted 27%. In comparison, the industry has risen nearly 20%, as seen in the chart below.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
From a valuation standpoint, Beam Therapeutics seems to be more expensive than Intellia Therapeutics, going by the price/book (P/B) ratio. BEAM’s shares currently trade at 2.63 times trailing book value, higher than 1.22 for NTLA.
Though both companies are innovating in gene editing, Beam Therapeutics seems to be the safer pick at present (despite its pricey valuation). While Intellia’s pipeline is in late-stage development and appears closer to a commercial launch, the setback with nex-z has cast a negative sentiment around the stock. On the contrary, BEAM’s broader pipeline, spanning both in vivo and ex vivo therapies, offers greater diversification to investors despite being in early-stage development.
We believe there is room for growth in BEAM stock, driven by solid fundamentals and a recent positive uptrend in stock price movement.
See More Zacks Research for These Tickers
Normally $25 each - click below to receive one report FREE:
Image: Bigstock
BEAM vs. NTLA: Which Gene Editing Stock Holds More Potential?
Key Takeaways
Beam Therapeutics (BEAM - Free Report) and Intellia Therapeutics (NTLA - Free Report) are clinical-stage companies developing investigational gene therapies. While BEAM’s pipeline candidates are still in early-stage development, NTLA is evaluating two candidates in late-stage development.
But which one makes for a better investment pick today? Let's examine the fundamentals of the two stocks to make a prudent choice.
The Case for BEAM
Beam Therapeutics is one of the few biotechs that has shown immense potential in the gene therapy space. The company’s proprietary base-editing technology potentially enables the development of a differentiated class of precision genetic medicines that target a single base in the genome without making a double-stranded break in the DNA, thereby minimizing errors.
One of the company’s assets developed using the above technology is BEAM-101, an ex vivo therapy being evaluated in the phase I/II BEACON study for sickle cell disease (SCD). Initial safety and efficacy data from this study (announced last December) showed that treatment with BEAM-101 led to a robust and durable increase in fetal hemoglobin and a reduction in sickle hemoglobin. Updated data from this study will be provided at the 2025 ASH annual meeting next month. The FDA recently granted orphan drug and regenerative medicine advanced therapy (RMAT) designations to BEAM-101 in the SCD indication.
BEAM recently initiated dosing in a phase I healthy volunteer study evaluating BEAM-103, an experimental anti-CD117 monoclonal antibody for the treatment of SCD.
Beam is also exploring the potential of in vivo therapies. Unlike ex-vivo therapies, where cells are removed, modified and then inserted back into one’s body, in vivo therapies involve infusing new genes directly into the body. The company is currently developing two such candidates — BEAM-301 and BEAM-302 — for treating glycogen storage disease type 1a (GSD1a) and alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD), respectively, in separate phase I/II studies. While Beam Therapeutics is currently dosing patients in the BEAM-301 study, an update on the BEAM-302 study is expected in early 2026.
The company also has partnerships with pharma giants like Eli Lilly and Pfizer, which provide financial support in the form of collaboration revenues.
Yet, Beam's biggest challenge lies in its lack of an approved product in its portfolio. Since the company’s pipeline is still in early- to mid-stage development, there are still at least a couple of years away from a potential market launch. As a result, the company is highly dependent on its collaboration partners for growth. Any dispute with these partners could be detrimental to Beam’s economic interests and may adversely impact the stock.
The Case for NTLA
While most gene editing biotechs start with an initial focus on ex vivo therapies, Intellia took a different approach by focusing on the more complex in vivo approach. The company is currently advancing two late-stage in vivo candidates — lonvo-z (formerly NTLA-2002) for hereditary angioedema (HAE) and nex-z (formerly NTLA-2001) for transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis.
In September, Intellia completed enrolment in the pivotal phase III HAELO study evaluating lonvo-z as a one-shot therapy to prevent HAE attacks by suppressing the plasma kallikrein activity. Top-line data from this study are expected by mid-2026. If this data is positive, a commercial launch for the therapy is planned by the first half of 2027.
The company’s second candidate, nex-z, is being developed in collaboration with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN - Free Report) . Last month, NTLA suffered a major setback when the FDA placed a clinical hold on two late-stage studies — MAGNITUDE and MAGNITUDE-2 — evaluating this Regeneron-partnered therapy for ATTR amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) and ATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy (ATTRv-PN), respectively.
This hold was placed after a patient in the MAGNITUDE study experienced grade 4 liver transaminase elevations, indicating a notable increase in liver enzymes. As of Nov. 6, Intellia claimed that this adverse effect occurred in less than 1% of all patients enrolled in the MAGNITUDE study. No such events have been reported in the MAGNITUDE-2 study. Although NTLA is actively working with investigators and regulators to understand the issue and develop additional risk-mitigation strategies, it has raised concerns about nex-z’s safety in the long run.
Like Beam, Intellia also lacks a stable revenue stream. To curb cash burn, Intellia started a strategic reorganization at the start of this year focused on prioritizing the development of its late-stage candidates. As part of this initiative, it stopped development of some research programs, including the in vivo gene insertion candidate, NTLA-3001, for AATD-associated lung disease. NTLA is looking to reduce its current workforce by nearly 27% before year-end.
How Do Estimates Compare for BEAM & NTLA?
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for BEAM’s 2025 sales implies a year-over-year decline of nearly 37% while loss estimates per share are expected to improve by 3%. Loss estimates for both 2025 and 2026 have widened over the past 30 days.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
We expect NTLA’s 2025 sales to decline about 4% year over year, while the bottom-line estimates are expected to narrow by nearly 24%. Loss estimates for 2025 and 2026 have narrowed over the past 30 days.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
Price Performance and Valuation of BEAM & NTLA
Year to date, shares of BEAM have gained 1%, while those of NTLA have plummeted 27%. In comparison, the industry has risen nearly 20%, as seen in the chart below.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
From a valuation standpoint, Beam Therapeutics seems to be more expensive than Intellia Therapeutics, going by the price/book (P/B) ratio. BEAM’s shares currently trade at 2.63 times trailing book value, higher than 1.22 for NTLA.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
BEAM or NTLA: Which Is a Better Pick?
Both Beam and Intellia carry a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold), which makes choosing one stock over the other difficult. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.
Though both companies are innovating in gene editing, Beam Therapeutics seems to be the safer pick at present (despite its pricey valuation). While Intellia’s pipeline is in late-stage development and appears closer to a commercial launch, the setback with nex-z has cast a negative sentiment around the stock. On the contrary, BEAM’s broader pipeline, spanning both in vivo and ex vivo therapies, offers greater diversification to investors despite being in early-stage development.
We believe there is room for growth in BEAM stock, driven by solid fundamentals and a recent positive uptrend in stock price movement.