FINNEGASmethodology →

distress — two deals that went into distress

What was knowable at deal date, what Finnegas would have output from that input, and what actually happened. We price the clinical-durability trigger; we do not claim to predict commercial blow-ups — we refuse those, on the record.

1 calibrated durability hit·1 honest refusal
roctaviandurability calibration hit
biomarin · severe hemophilia A · 4-yr durability warranty
knowable at deal datethe warranty turns on 3 metrics — factor level · bleeding · resumption; its modelled basis was 2%/yr → 7.8% cumulative over 4yr (ICER 2022)
finnegas output (read per trigger definition)switching basis: ~16.7% by yr4 (band 10.8–23.8%), ~2.3× the 7.8% assumed · strict 3-criteria clinical loss: 8.3% — the answer swings ~2× with the definition
what actually happenedswitching / resumption 24/134 ≈ 17.9% by yr4 (inside the band) · strict clinical composite 9.0% (Santos 2025) · product withdrawn, ~$240M commercial restructuring
the honest claima retrospective calibration hit on the durability trigger, priced per definition — not a forward prediction; the ~$240M that vaporised sat on the commercial axis we refuse to price, and the refusal is the read that came true in dollars
buyer takeawayunder-priced ~2.3× on the switching basis it was written against — and we price the trigger definition, not one printed rate, because it moves the answer 2×; the independent, audit-trailed read they lacked
lyfgeniahonest refusal
bluebird · severe sickle cell · ex-vivo lentiviral-HSC
knowable at deal date$175M facility tranched on patient-start / uptake milestones · pivotal VOE-CR 28/32 ≈ 88% · FDA boxed AML/MDS warning
finnegas output (three reads)BANKABLE durability rating · REFUSE the commercial-uptake trigger · NAME the latent safety tail it can't yet calibrate
what actually happeneddurability HELD · uptake collapsed · bluebird taken private at $3.00/share + CVR, Jun 2025 — a commercial, not clinical, failure
the honest claimrefused, not predicted — durability correctly not flagged; the insolvency is a commercial outcome above the ceiling
buyer takeawaya lender pricing this needed all three reads — bankable durability, a refusal on the commercial trigger, the named safety tail — and had an auditable record of none

scope: clinical-durability trigger only · commercial-sales prediction refused (cited ~45–71% forecast-error ceiling) · both cases counterparty-screened — neither issuer nor financier is on the outreach board.