We have updated our investment case on Gubra following the Q3 trading statement, the R&D Event in London on 27 October and this week’s change of executive leadership. The quarter delivered on the pipeline, but the more consequential development was strategic: Gubra set out for the first time what it intends the platform to look like by 2030. 

The platform already has a record to stand on. Gubra has six active partnerships with pharma and biotech, four assets in clinical development, and has received over USD 400m in upfronts and milestones in the past two years, while the CRO segment counts 17 of the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies among its clients. That is the basis for what management set out in London: an ambition of 8 to 10 clinical-stage assets by 2030, one to two development candidates nominated each year from the company’s own discovery engine from 2030, and activity across three therapeutic areas rather than one, spanning metabolic disease, age-related functional decline, and immunology and inflammation. The ambition is an extension of a model that has already worked rather than a departure from it. 

On the pipeline itself, both partnered obesity assets are now in Phase 2. AbbVie presented the full ABBV-295 Phase 1 dataset at EASD in September, showing weight loss of almost 10% at 12 to 13 weeks, a predominantly mild GI tolerability profile, and pharmacokinetics that support dosing intervals beyond once-weekly. That places the asset broadly on par with the class benchmark, Eli Lilly’s eloralintide, and ahead of Zealand and Roche’s petrelintide at up to 8.6% over 16 weeks, with the caveat that ABBV-295’s data come from a lighter sub-30 BMI population that was 88% male and, if anything, understates the signal. The ongoing Phase 1b study at BMI 30 to 45 addresses exactly that question.

GUB-UCN2 is in the clinic and the R&D Event gave the trial structure in detail for the first time. The Phase 1/2a enrols around 188 participants and runs in three parts: a single ascending dose part in healthy participants now running, a six-week multiple ascending dose part in people with obesity, and a 16-week arm with multiple populations and dosing regimens. Body composition is measured by MRI rather than DEXA, which allows muscle volume to be separated from the rest of lean mass, with thigh imaging for muscle quality and a function battery covering gait speed, sit-to-stand, balance and knee extension strength.

Those two assets carry the near-term catalysts. Topline from AbbVie’s Phase 1b is guided for H1 2027, though interim data are anticipated around the end of 2026 (stated by AbbVie’s head of R&D on the partner’s own Q3 earnings call, not guided by Gubra). GUB-UCN2 delivers single ascending dose data in H1 2027, on broadly the same timeline as Hanmi’s Phase 1 completion, and the first body composition data from the multiple ascending dose part at the turn of 2027 and 2028. 

That timing is the main reason we have pushed the assumed partnering of GUB-UCN2 from 2027 to 2028, and launch from 2033 to 2034 with it. A partner is likely to want the body composition readout rather than the dose-escalation data, and Gubra’s capital position removes any pressure to deal before then.

urthermore, on the back of the R&D Event we have cut the milestone pool for the other partnered assets from DKK 4,500m to DKK 1,850m. The previous figure came from the IPO prospectus and included value from agreements not yet signed, which we exclude everywhere else in the model. The pool is now built bottom-up from the deal economics disclosed in London: up to EUR 240m in total from Boehringer Ingelheim for BI 3034701, of which EUR 10m was paid in July; over USD 50m from Amylyx for AMX0318; a mid-single-digit EUR m regulatory milestone from Hemab for HMB-003, which entered Phase 1 during the quarter; and no disclosed milestone package for the Camurus PTH analogue. BI 1820237 has been discontinued in obesity and carries nothing. We have also moved the ABBV-295 launch year from 2031 to 2032, aligning the revenue profile with a milestone ladder we had already shifted on the Phase 2 design. Besides that, we have made only minor changes to our model.

The case is balanced by genuine risk. The obesity field is intensely competitive and the category is young enough that its long-term structure is unsettled. GUB-UCN2’s mechanism is commercially validated but clinically unproven, and the Genentech transaction placed a well-funded competitor on a similar timeline. Value depends on partners’ prioritisation decisions, and CRO margin recovery still needs to be delivered. On 10 November Markus Rohrwild stepped down as CEO, with CFO Kristian Borbos and Head of Gubra Ventures Zoë Johnson appointed co-CEOs alongside their current roles. The Board states that the 2030 strategy presented two weeks earlier is unchanged, but a leadership change at this point can still create uncertainty among investors about direction and execution. 

Taken together, and after isolating the D&P pipeline by valuing the CRO segment separately, our base case implies a market-implied PoS of around 17%, against 23% in the bear case and 13% in the bull case. The historical benchmark is around 26% from Phase 1 to market and around 46% from Phase 2, and with two of the three main value drivers now in Phase 2, a blended benchmark for Gubra’s pipeline sits closer to the higher figure. The gap has widened rather than narrowed over the quarter. 

A discount of that size is difficult to attribute to the usual causes. Net cash of around DKK 715m at 30 June, and close to DKK 1.1bn pro forma for the Q3 milestones, makes a dilutive capital raise unlikely, so the discount investors normally apply to an early-stage biotech that will have to return to the market does not belong here. A large share of the modelled value also comes from milestones rather than long-dated royalties. USD 1.825bn remains outstanding on the AbbVie agreement alone, close to three times the current enterprise value, and those payments are triggered by development progress rather than by pricing and reimbursement outcomes a decade from now.

The model is also deliberately narrow. It values only what is signed and in the clinic today. It carries no value for the 2030 ambition of 8 to 10 clinical-stage assets or for the partnerships those assets would attract, none for Gubra Ventures or Gubra Green, none for the combination optionality AbbVie has signalled for ABBV-295 in immunology, and none for GUB-UCN2 beyond its lead indication. The platform that is expected to generate the next wave of candidates is excluded entirely. On that basis the discount to the historical benchmark should be narrower, not wider.

The investment case also includes a page comparing GUB-UCN2 and HM17321 side by side on what each company has published, updated with Hanmi’s ADA 2026 preclinical data.

For further detail on the 2030 strategy and the UCN2 programme, you can watch the event we hosted with Gubra’s management: https://www.inderes.dk/videos/gubra-praesentation-af-q3-2026

Disclaimer: HC Andersen Capital receives payment from Gubra for a Digital IR/Corporate Visibility subscription agreement. Michael Friis and Victor Skriver, 08:30, 11.11.2026.