Logical Thesis@LogicalThesis
Pitch Time: $PSNL
Excluding 2021 exuberance, this stock essentially made a new ATH this year, and since it is down >50%
This is most likely due to being a cash burning, low margin, small cap in a higher rate environment. Or maybe even due to irrational fears of AI disruption (huh?).
They posted 22% GMs in 2025, and 11% in Q4. Yuck, right? The market seems to think so, too.
This is a situation where the stock will not currently screen well, but I believe by the time it does the opportunity will be gone. It is a margin expansion + exponential volume growth story.
So then why is this compelling?
1) They have a more sensitive cancer detection test than the current leader $NTRA
2) They said they would get insurance reimbursement coverage, and they already received it for 2 indications (breast and lung in Nov and Feb, respectively). They have a third indication IO pending approval. I don't see why this won't follow suit.
3) The path to reimbursement has capped their ability to charge normal prices. Under reimbursement pricing, the tests should be around ~60% GMs (and mgmt said could be higher if pricing goes up). Reimbursement coverage takes time; NTRA also had to go through this.
4) They guided for clinical test volumes to 3X this year. Their partnered with $TEM as their commercialization distribution partner, who also owns a 20% stake in PSNL. TEM mentioned that they could have 20X-ed their MRD test sales if they were unblocked. Unblocked? Yes, it is clear that PSNL wants to continue to grow and expand market share but does not want to do too much self-inflicted damage with a full scale roll out before receiving reimbursement. The margins are far lower in this scenario. Note that PSNL's MRD tests make up 95% of MRD tests that TEM offers, and they were up 56% QoQ.
5) The lung and breast cancer tests make up ~40% of PSNL's overall test volumes. With this product shift, their gross margins should march higher over time in a step change function. And as they get IO reimbursement approval, and eventually submit for CRC, then nearly 80% of their tests will be at the 60% GMs number. That's a huge step up from today's 11% GMs in Q4.
6) Their deal with TEM is said to be around 20-25% marketing costs per test. So 60% GM, 25% OpEx, and you get a 35% net profit margin at the test level. Of course the biz will have other fixed costs and expenses, but this is the north star as the company scales.
So why does this opportunity exist?
Because they are currently at what I think will be the absolute lows for their Gross Margin profile. They are burning half of their cash stack this year (total >200M, burning 100M), but I expect this cash burn to decline as margins increase.
And if AI replacement is the fear here, well, they have a few moats:
1) years of data from their tests in clinical settings
2) insurance coverage
3) first mover advantage
4) a robust commercial partner with TEM
Imo, these things do not implode overnight.