Listen here or on the go via Apple Podcasts and Spotify
Jonathan Faison shares his approach to investing in biotech, the ‘riskiest’ sector (1:35). Recent lows and seeing through the volatility (4:10). Sector winners (9:20). Do sector ETFs make sense? (21:00) Updates on Sutro Biopharma and Voyager Therapeutics (24:15).
Learn more about Jonathan’s ROTY Biotech Community
Transcript
Rena Sherbill: Jonathan Faison, welcome to Investing Experts. Welcome to the Podcast. It’s great to have you on the show.
Jonathan Faison: Hey, thanks. Happy to be here, Rena.
RS: It’s nice to have you on talking biotech, a sector we sometimes talk about, but not enough, especially for those invested in the sector, I bet feeling that way.
You run an investing group on Seeking Alpha called ROTY Biotech Community. I’m interested how you would articulate for our listeners how you approach the biotech part of things and how you approach the sector.
JF: So it’s notorious that biotech is probably the riskiest sector in the market. So we have the highest upside potential in terms of when you get the story right, when a company’s drug gets to market and is sold, lots of buyouts occur. So that’s part of the appeal is waking up and seeing one of your holdings bought out by a larger pharmaceutical company.
But on the converse side, there’s a lot of stories out there that are zero or hero. And what I mean by that is if the company reports negative clinical results, especially if that’s their only asset, they can lose 90% or more of their value in one day.
So in my 20s, I did a lot more catalyst trading, which was focusing on these specific readouts. Very thankful for how that worked out, the highs and the lows. It was successful in the early days of ROTY. We started the biotech service in 2018. And around 2021 to ‘22 when the biotech bear market started, I realized, it’s adapt or die, especially in this type of market and realized that looking at multi-year clinical and commercial momentum was more the direction I wanted to go in.
So that’s what we focus on now is stories, these situations where its heads win big when things go well over a multi-year timeframe. For example, where is the pipeline going? Where is the product launch going 2025 to 2026, for example? And on the downside, trying to capture downside as much as possible, derisking via multiple drug candidates, shots on goal, cash position, proof of concept data sets, et cetera.
So we’re trying to find those situations where the risk reward profile is very asymmetric. Not all of them will work out, but the idea being if you have a high batting average, more of them will work out than not. And looking back over the past year or two, you’ll be happy where your portfolio has gone. So that’s it in a nutshell.
RS: I want to pick at the specific names a little bit, but I’m curious, given that we’re coming off of lows that we haven’t seen in a few years out of the biotech sector and speaking to that volatility and low lows, how do you encourage investors to see through it? Is it just that?
Is it picking out the winners in the industry? Is it picking out the ones that are going to see it through the best possible chance – or at least have the best possible chance to do so? Is that the way to see through the volatility?
JF: Before I say see through the volatility, one thing I like to say is we’re pretty transparent with winners and losers. And so if this call had taken place, I guess it was like two weeks ago, or a week ago, even the (XBI) was at new 52-week highs around 104.
So if this call had happened then I would have been more, I don’t want to say cheerleading, but the portfolio was up 43% for the year. And at highs, you’re feeling pretty good about yourself, much like any investor. And then over the last week, it’s been nothing but red in the XBI. So it’s fallen from 104 below all major moving averages, the 20, the 15, the 200-day. And so the 43% year-to-date gain has fallen to 25%.
So it’s never fun to see that type of erosion giving gains back to the market. But yeah, exactly what you said, I tend to focus more on individual companies, individual stories, where the pipeline and the commercial momentum is going over the next year to two, for example, three to five-year timeframe.
So when you do that, you’re able to take advantage of weakness, volatility, prioritize which setups are looking the strongest or the most undervalued. A lot of these commercial setups, for example, I’ll look at them when they’re valued at an enterprise value of one times peak sales.
So if the company, for example, their drug candidate is approved, much like, let’s say, SpringWorks Therapeutics (SWTX), Ogsiveo, if it’s a $1 billion peak sales potential and at one point the enterprise value is trading at or below that that sets you up.
It doesn’t mean you’re going to win, but you’re setting yourself up in a high probability scenario, where over the next couple of years there’s a lot higher probability it works out than it doesn’t assuming your due diligence is correct.
So trying to find more of those setups in our sweet spot where they’re priced cheaply relative to peak sales, generally approved drugs or late stage. Personally, my track record in preclinical to early stage clinical is mediocre at best. So I tend to focus on late stage and commercial.
RS: Is it your opinion that the decline recently in biotech has to do with more of the macro picture and who’s in government? Do you subscribe to that idea?
JF: To be honest, I leave that to smarter minds. There’s definitely the political and regulatory uncertainty who are we going to be put in charge of the FDA, health services, et cetera. There’s also the inflation worries where you’re starting to see that come back up again.
So one of my biggest messages to people is simply, yes, there’s opportunity here, but also don’t be a hero. Some people will go all in on either specific stock picks or their exposure to biotech or another sector for that matter. And so don’t being a hero means, I mean, keeping your exposure to a level that you can sleep well at night.
So some of the guys in our chat, if they are, for example, retirees, maybe they have 5% of their portfolio in biotech. So if it does really well, that gives the portfolio a boost. And if it’s a rough period, they have their other lower risk areas of their investments to help balance that out.
So for me, I, for example, mentioned the one-to-one rule for myself personally, which is for every new dollars I’m depositing to my investment accounts, every $1 in biotech is balanced out with my low-risk bucket, whether that’s dividend indexed funds, et cetera. So those are ways to help manage your emotion and make sure you have a system in place and get rid of that gambler mentality.
RS: What guides you as you’re looking for these opportunities? Are there specific metrics that you’re paying attention to? What are the benchmarks that you’re looking for along the way?
JF: Sure. It’s more each day, I’m regularly scanning the charts, whether it’s gainers or losers, I’m checking the news. And most of the time, it’ll turn up dry, when we can even have dry periods of a month or two where I have no new ideas.
And maybe that’s something that sets ROTY apart in terms of, I know the industry is about publishing more material, but I only publish when I have something worth saying. I don’t want to waste people’s time.
So when we’re looking at opportunities, it’s more – I’ll listen to more calls. Like recently we had the Jefferies and the Stifel healthcare conference. And if you listen to a story where it sounds like the thesis is firing on all cylinders, it’s especially compelling, then that’s something to dig deeper. And then you compare that to, like we said, valuation of 1 to 1.5x peak sales versus the enterprise value.
That’s just a sweet spot for me personally. Like I’m again, trying to find these situations where there’s high upside potential, but your risk is capped as much as possible. It doesn’t mean I won’t have my binary losers. Landmines happen in biotech, but at least you’re trying to reduce that as much as possible.
RS: So who are the names that you’re looking at right now? Who has you the most excited as you’re looking across the sector?
JF: I’m glad you mentioned that. A recent winner that we still own 8% of the portfolio in, I’ve taken partial profits twice on the way up, but it’s still firing on all cylinders, is Tarsus Pharmaceuticals (TARS). Tarsus, they have their lead drug, XDEMVY, which is for a very non-sexy indication of Demodex blepharitis, which are basically the mites on your eyelids.
So there are a few off-label treatments there. People thought the XDEMVY would not do well in launch. We got in when the early metrics were positive. So that was a fun run from $15 to say $40, mid-40s currently.
And one would think, oh, that’s actually, all the upside has been had, but it’s actually, let’s see, $1.8 billion market cap. So around $1.5 billion or so enterprise value. And so what’s interesting is that’s still only 1x to 1.5x peak sales. So that’s one of those stories where thesis is firing on all cylinders, all the launch metrics are set to accelerate into 2025. So the remaining position just holding patiently.
As far as one that is maybe more applicable to investors wanting to get in on the early stage, it would be SpringWorks Therapeutics (SWTX). That’s currently my number one holding around 13% of the portfolio.
And what’s fun there is Ogsiveo is getting launched. It’s about one year into launch for the indication of desmoid tumors, these slow-growing tumors that cause pain, they cause – they impact the range of motion for these patients. There’s been nothing approved.
So in the past, it would be doctors in watch and wait mode to see when they had to intervene. There would be chemo, treatment with TKIs, nothing particularly good. And Ogsiveo got approved, the long-term open label data shows patients on drug for up to four years, at least three. So you’ll have that stacking effect over time as it gets launched. The ICD-10 claims codes just came out over 10,000 unique claims in under a year.
So as management noted in their Q3 call, the denominator, the addressable market is larger than they had anticipated. Over 90% of doctors are saying, they will use the drug again. 90% say they will use it in frontline. Ogsiveo already has 70% market share of any new prescription for desmoid tumors. They’re only 10% penetrated already at $200 million to $250 million annualized run rate.
And so it’s just a very interesting story still. Let me pull that up on the valuation. But what’s interesting is even though it’s rebounded from the high-20s, it’s still only at $37 a share. I’m trying to remember the cash position on hand, but even if it’s around maybe $2.3 billion or so enterprise value, that’s versus a $1 billion estimated peak sales and that’s conservative for Ogsiveo, I think personally it’s closer to $1.5 billion and they have Mirdametinib for NF1-PN indication, which should be approved. It has a priority review with a PDUFA date in February of next year.
So next year, the company has three launches planned: European Union launch for Ogsiveo, U.S. launch for Mirdametinib, and the ex-U.S. launch for Mirdametinib in the second half of next year.
So Blueprint Medicines (BPMC) was a winner for us earlier this year that has sold. And it was a similar situation where valuation stays low at first because it’s cloudy, you don’t know how the launch metrics are going to look out of the gate. And as they get more clarity, patients stacking, staying on treatment longer, that’s when the market tends to reward these stories. It tends to be skeptical, prove it to me mode.
And so Q3 call for SpringWorks Therapeutics strengthened the thesis for me for the reasons I mentioned before. And so it’s still very early stages for people. I’ve stated before buying it below $40, it’s at 37, if you’re looking at the 2025 to 2026 timeframe.
So those are examples of stories we look for where a thesis is firing on all cylinders. And it’s funny, I keep getting questions from investors like, okay, now that the Q3 call has come out, what’s your updated trade plan? And I’ve stated that my goal is to be boringly predictable, boringly profitable.
And so here too, I just hold patiently as long as the valuation is reasonable and the story is going in the right direction, so I’m not trying to reinvent the wheel here.
RS: Would you say the risks there are in the unknown? Like waiting for more data to come out?
JF: For Ogsiveo, I’d say there’s less data risk because we already have open label extension data. For Mirdametinib, it is a PDUFA date in February with priority review, but with the FDA, anything is possible. So even if I put that, let’s say, 80% or 90% chance of being approved, there’s still that 10% chance, there’s something manufacturing-related or what have you. So regulatory uncertainty is always possible.
For Mirdametinib, they’re going up against AstraZeneca (AZN) which is a much larger company as you can imagine, big pharma. AstraZeneca’s drug, Koselugo, is only approved in the pediatric indication for children, which is just one quarter of the NF1-PN market, and they are going to get approved in adult.
But after SpringWorks who has the lead there, SpringWorks, their drug looks to have the edge on efficacy also lower incidence of Grade 3 events. With Koselugo, they’re already losing half of their patients within a year due to tolerability issues among others.
So there’s definitely the opportunity for switch, but you’re definitely right. It’s always whenever a small company is going up against big pharma, that is a cause for concern. That is a risk factor because one has a lot better infrastructure and unlimited resources versus a small company.
RS: I’m curious, and you don’t have to have an opinion on this because it’s not your area of focus, but psychedelics are a part of the market that we’ve covered before on the podcast and we cover on the Cannabis Investing Podcast.
And speaking to the point of like unknowns and waiting for pipelines to develop and the unknowability of the FDA and where their decisions may or may not fall and haven’t fallen when it comes to psychedelics, any thoughts about how investors should be thinking about either that part of the market or the more unknown or less developed kind of columns within the biotech sector?
JF: That’s definitely not an area that I’ve been looking in recently, just because most of the ones that are interesting to me are early stage, so I have to wait. There’s that thing I like to say, there’s a lot of companies that are in the science project phase, and that’s where they’re throwing a drug candidates against the wall in preclinical Phase 1 and seeing where it sticks.
And so with psychedelics, there’s definitely some really good data out there, mushrooms, et cetera, but you had to have to see that replicated in either Phase 2, Phase 3 placebo-controlled studies. Also, like you said, the unknowns there as far as the scheduling, what class, what type of restrictions are going to be on the label, et cetera, that’s a little bit outside my wheelhouse.
So if something looks like a coin flip to me, that’s not enough, I have to have as many factors in my favor as possible. But that said, definitely for investors who are interested in those high risk, high reward plays, it can make sense. I’m just not a fan of lottery tickets personally. That reminds me of Leap Therapeutics, (LPTX), which a lot of guys in our chat like.
And what’s interesting is they have a buy-in from Pfizer (PFE) who owns part of the company. They have a readout in colorectal cancer middle of next year. They also have a preclinical drug candidate targeting GDF-15, which could be used for cachexia in cancer. And so it has a very minuscule enterprise value. And if you’re right, that could be five-bagger, 10-bagger, et cetera. But I have questions on the intellectual property of their lead candidate, et cetera.
So it’s just as with psychedelics, as with other areas, if there’s too many unknowns, those will stay on my radar, but they’re not investable for me personally, just because I need as much derisking and downside cushion as possible to make me feel comfortable.
RS: Why focus specifically on biotech? I’m curious.
JF: That’s a great question. When I started investing in 2008, tried many different strategies, different sectors, whether it was tech, real estate, you name it, dividend, metals and mining. Biotech from, I think, a reason a lot of us are in it is because of intellectual curiosity too.
You’re always reading about the latest studies, treatments being involved in some way for advancing and bettering the care for these patients, whether it’s curing patients, whether it’s extending lives or making them better. Each of us has personal stories in our families too, whether it’s somebody we’ve known who’s had cancer or Alzheimer’s or Parkinson, you name it.
I also had a fire lit under me. I think this sector, for many people we feel as outsiders, if it’s not our background in the medical arena, that it’s only for specialists. And to be fair, it is in a way. But that’s not to say that people on main street, the rest of us can’t have success there.
When I started writing articles on Seeking Alpha, one thing I really appreciated was the comments. I was just sharing my ideas. I never expected anything bigger to come up from it much less having an investment service. But what I really enjoyed was the comments. Many of them were brutal. They were from whether doctors or other people in specific spaces I was discussing.
And when I said, hey, here’s the investment opportunity, they would respond in the comments actually, no, here’s how I prescribe it in my practice, or here are some aspects of the bear thesis that you’re overlooking. And so that kind of lit a fire under me to learn more.
And also I had quite a few mistakes that should have been account ending along the way, whether it was binary blow ups or I didn’t have much in the way of risk management, for example, my maximum portfolio weighting rule currently is to make sure I combat that gambling mentality.
So for commercial stage biotech, the maximum I can own no matter how much I love the company is 10% of the portfolio. And for clinical stage, it’s 5%. And so rules like that, everything I learned along the way is hopefully to help other investors not go through everything I did, accelerate their learning curve.
And that’s what I love about our chat is we have over 500 investors, some of them are veterans, been doing this 20-plus years, others are newbies, but we’re all sharing what we’re learning together and helping each other out.
That can be good during the hot streaks, people to keep us level headed. And when things are pretty rough, and you’re just trying to hang in there, like the current downturn in biotech, it’s nice to have other people speak into your portfolio, life, tell you what you can do better, where to improve. And so investing is not meant to be a solo sport, in my opinion.
RS: Yeah, I like that you have community built into the name. One of my favorite things of Seeking Alpha, and you spoke to this just now, is the level of commenting on the site. It furthers the conversation and deepens the conversation. And community, it’s often talked about in a very trite way, but if done correctly, when done correctly, avails us all to exponential growth and awareness. So kudos for highlighting that part of things.
I’m curious what you think of ETFs in the space and who those make sense for, and do they make sense for certain investors?
JF: Oh, without a doubt, they make sense for investors. Just like Warren Buffett said, a lot of people would be better off in index funds, putting their money away and not having to think about it, so they can focus on their daily lives, the things that are important to them.
My father, for example, he invests a lot in cash value life insurance. And so some people would make fun of him because, oh, it’s only a 5% return a year. And maybe one year his friends do really well on Apple (AAPL) and they’re kind of laughing your 5% doesn’t look so well. But when the market is down 40%, that 5% return is looking pretty nice.
And so same thing applies to biotech ETFs. If a person wants, let’s say, 3% of their overall portfolio in biotech and they don’t want to pick the winners and have to decide which ones are going to be winners, losers, it can make sense to find the ETF that’s right for you, have that exposure, and not have to think about it.
So 100% agree. Another way to do that, which some people do in chat, is they will have only a handful of biotechs. So they’ll own mainly ETFs or dividend indexed funds or other funds of other sorts, and they’ll only own maybe three to five biotech stocks.
So definitely should be a number that you can follow easily that should not affect your life that you should have to be staring at a screen the entire time. For me personally, my sweet spot is around 15 stocks, 15 companies that I can follow relatively closely. For other people that might be three to five And for others, it definitely makes sense to save yourself the hassle and the headache because it’s definitely takes effort to find the winners.
For us, I feel that it’s worth it when we do well. But if you’re not willing to put in that effort, definitely makes sense to do indexed funds and that way you don’t have to put in that time and effort that maybe is better used elsewhere. So definitely we should tell that as it is.
RS: Anything specific to note about the various ETFs or anything you would highlight or make note of there?
JF: Nothing off the top of my head, but you do look at the top 10 holdings and see if you agree with those for the most part, because those are the higher percentages of the portfolio. Also, what’s the maximum weighting they allow for each holding, so you know how exposed you are to individual company risk.
And then lastly, of course, compare the prices, the annual cost of each one. And that applies not only to ETFs, but I would also argue investment services, charting tools that investors use, including ROTY Biotech Community.
You have to look at the price of the service and determine if that adds enough value for you because every investor, whether they have, let’s say, a $10,000 portfolio, 50, 100, a million, whatever it is, one of the very few things we can control as investors is keeping our costs down.
So I try to own only services, whether charting or news feeds, et cetera, that add the most value for me, give me the biggest bang for my buck. Otherwise it’s a paralysis by analysis, you’re reading too much. So that applies to my service and any other tools that people use.
RS: I’m curious the last couple of stocks that you wrote about on Seeking Alpha on the free side. I’m curious if you have any updates to give on Sutro Biopharma (STRO) or Voyager Therapeutics (VYGR). Any thoughts there?
JF: Not really. Let me pull those up. But Sutro was one, the ADC, antibody-drug conjugate space. It has been pretty lucrative. Last year, we owned ImmunoGen, which was a full-size position in the portfolio and got bought out by AbbVie (ABBV). So I’ve been wanting to try to find more players in that space.
Sutro, I wanted to reevaluate because it was trading at negative enterprise value below the value of its cash. The problem for me was the ovarian cancer space was too crowded. There’s something like eight to 10 new therapies in late-stage development.
ImmunoGen is already approved in the folate receptor alpha ADC, and it has a next-generation one for the lower expressors. So I’m really struggling to see the white space or open space for Sutro. So their next-generation candidates in the pipeline look interesting, but were too early stage for me.
Voyager Therapeutics likewise, as we talked about, was at that science project phase of development. There’s some interesting gene therapy programs. They are licensing out their vectors to big pharma. So both of those are situations where, hey, if it works out, that could be a big gainer.
But they’re not for me either because of being too early stage, I don’t see clear paths to market as of yet.
Sutro’s lead program, Luvelta could be an example of a program that could be high probability of clinically successful meaning they have a positive Phase 3 readout and it gets approved. But just because a drug gets approved doesn’t mean it’s going to be successful commercially.
Some of these readouts, I’m usually, I’ll put it this way, my number one priority is trades for the portfolio. And I only trade two to four days per month. When I’m not trading, I’m writing down rough drafts of thesis of each investment idea. I have a playbook on my phone, which is where I order by priority which companies I would move dollars into a new position when they free up.
And when there are no trades on radar, those dry periods is when I’m able to write full sized company articles like Sutro, like Voyager. And even if they’re not up to investment quality for us, they’re not currently candidates, I think it helps us to sharpen ourselves as investors to do that deeper due diligence, digging through the quarterly filings, the annual filings, listening to presentations, something we should be doing for all names.
I wish I had the time to publish more of these articles. And hopefully in the future, I will during those dry periods, but they definitely come second to trades.
RS: You mentioned some of your data sources. Do you have any favored ones or you feel like too many people overlook them as sources of data?
JF: I mean, the Seeking Alpha healthcare news is one – is a freebie. When in doubt, I always tell people start with the free resources first, see if that satisfies your need, whether it’s charts, whether it’s news, et cetera. And then from there, if you feel like you need more, if you want premium articles, et cetera, that’s when you work your way up.
So for me, I also use The Fly on The Wall. That’s a premium news source. I’ve been using that four-plus years. So I got grandfathered in it early on. So for me, again, the way I don’t get that paralysis by analysis is I’ll check it pre-market just to see whether it’s new data or quarterly reports, or et cetera, something that sticks out to me and I’ll check it post-market just for the same reason anybody’s reported new news, new data, et cetera. But those kind of scans really don’t take that long, let’s say, 15 minutes, and either something jumps out to you for further due diligence where it doesn’t.
So same thing goes for charting tools. Whether you’re looking at on a day where the biotech sector is really red, let’s say, it’s down 2%. I’ll often look at the gainers, for example, and see which companies are holding water or showing stability even in this tough environment.
And if there’s something, a chart that looks particularly constructive, whether they’re showing strength in the face of weakness or at least showing stability, then I’ll quickly look through their corporate presentation or the most recent quarterly report. If it looks compelling, then dig deeper into the recent webcasts, investment presentations, et cetera.
So, each company pretty quickly, you can tell within 10 or 15 minutes, if there’s something there that merits that deeper type of due diligence, and you want to only do the deeper due diligence where it’s merited. And even there, most will not work out or meet your investment criteria, but those that do make it worth it.
So that’s why it’s really important to know what you’re looking for and to have a clear idea of whether something meets your selection criteria or not. Otherwise, it’s kind of like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. I’ll be mulling over an idea, trying to make it fit my criteria, accelerating clinical and commercial momentum over the next few years, having a strong balance sheet, having a management team that continually executes, that under promises and over delivers, et cetera.
But if you don’t find that, you shouldn’t force it. Forced trades are where I make those unforced errors, those mistakes that could be avoided. And the way you can avoid that is only trade when you have a crystal clear rationale for why you are buying a new position or adding to an existing one, if that makes sense.
RS: Yeah, definitely. I think a good rule of thumb across life is don’t force things. It’s almost never a good idea.
JF: Well said, well said.
RS: Anything that we left out of this conversation? Anything else that you feel is worthy of investors’ attention at this point, be it stocks or things to pay attention to, or things not to pay attention to?
JF: I guess I’d reemphasize, and I don’t want this to come across as a marketing pitch, but the importance of having a community, whether you find a few other traders and investors on X or Twitter, however, you call it these days, there’s a great community there. If you can tune out the bad actors and focus on ones that resonate with you, or whether like ROTY Biotech Community, whatever it is. I learned everything the hard way. And also, I had a lot of mistakes that could have easily been avoided if I had veterans, had other people to help accelerate my learning curve.
So, however you find that, it’s important to not do it on your own, both to accelerate your learning curve and to help keep you humble during the high periods and to help keep you going during these tough times like the (XBI) currently, like the sector currently. So that’s something I would reemphasize.
The last thing I would say is when I built the service, when I started, I was an investor in 2008. I tried a lot of premium services and there were different things I liked, I didn’t like, et cetera.
So we built chat that way to kind of like asking myself, what would I like if I were somebody starting out? So we have main chat. We have commentary for me, which is basically like a channel where it’s a direct conversation, letting people read what’s going on in my mind, what I’m looking at, et cetera. We have a real-time trades channel, which I really like because of its actionability, where traders and investors are sharing what stocks they’re buying in real-time and why.
We have a top five holdings channel, where people are sharing their top five holdings in their portfolio and again why they own them. We even have a non-biotech channel covering other sectors, including crypto et cetera, technicals and indicators of people sharing charts and what they’re looking at.
So again, the whole idea of being learning from others, sharing your ideas together, we all have something to contribute with whether you’re just entering for the first time or you’ve been doing this for a couple of decades. But again, going back to the main point, whether here or on X, Twitter, et cetera, surround yourself with a good community and that will greatly increase your probability of being long-term profitable.
RS: Yeah, good stuff, Jonathan. Appreciate this conversation. Looking forward to another one soon, I hope.
For those looking for more community or more insight into the community, it’s ROTY Biotech Community on Seeking Alpha. It’s Jonathan Faison on Seeking Alpha for those who want some free articles before paying for stuff.
Appreciate this conversation, Jonathan, and also special Black Friday 20% off sale, as long as we’re plugging away. Let’s plug it right.
Editor’s Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.
Read the full article here