Filing Flows › Companies › Incyte › Analysis traps
Incyte (INCY): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 2026, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Oct 29, 2026; rules v1.1
Incyte (INCY): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026: stock compensation added back = no economic cost. 1 to review; 3 with insufficient data; 3 not applicable. Each is a question to verify, with the normal explanation that would produce the same figures.
Check these first
Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered · severity medium · confidence high
Stock compensation was $249M, 4.8% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and buybacks did not cover it. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
Innocent reading: A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 78.37 a share (price 119.30); 77% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 60.63 to 96.10; across every method the research ran the range is -78 to 260. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
Innocent reading: A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Insufficient data
fewer than two fiscal years with operating cash flow and capital expenditure on file
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered severity medium · confidence high
Stock compensation was $249M, 4.8% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and buybacks did not cover it. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $249M |
| Revenue | $5.1B |
| SBC / revenue | +4.9% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 210.5M shares |
| Diluted shares | 200.7M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -4.7% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY2025 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
What would explain it innocently
- A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows
- Buybacks at prices below intrinsic value make up for the dilution over time
- A one-off grant (an acquisition, a founder award) rather than a steady level
What to look for in the filing
- The share count after the latest buybacks (the next 10-Q's cover)
- The price paid for the buybacks against the shares' value
- Unvested awards outstanding
What would show the trap does not apply
- The diluted share count falls over two years with buybacks at least equal to the stock compensation
- Stock compensation falls as a share of revenue in each of the next two years
Look again: next filing.
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew 38% against revenue 14% in Q3 2026; DSO 70 against a median of 62: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 2026 |
| Revenue, year over year | +14.0% |
| Receivables, year over year | +38.1% |
| Quarter before | Q2 2026 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +37.7% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +33.5% |
| Days sales outstanding | 69.8 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 62.4 |
| Receivables | $1.2B |
| Revenue | $1.6B |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: Q3 2026 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Insufficient data
no reconciliation table read from the releases yet and fewer than three quarters with both an adjusted and a GAAP EPS
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Insufficient data
no debt figure could be read from the balance sheet (the filing may tag it in other lines)
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not applicable
a loss in one of the quarters: EPS growth has no meaning
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $403M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $447M, best $1.3B): the P/E of 60.1× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $24.2B |
| net income ttm | $403M |
| pe ttm | 60.10 |
| net income median fy | $447M |
| pe mid cycle | 54.30 |
| net income peak fy | $1.3B |
| years | FY2018 / 109.0; FY2019 / 447.0; FY2020 / -296.0; FY2021 / 949.0; FY2022 / 341.0; FY2023 / 598.0; FY2024 / 33.0; FY2025 / 1287.0 |
| down years in window | 3 |
P/E on the trailing twelve months' net income against the P/E on the median net income of the last eight fiscal years (a mid-cycle stand-in); 'at a peak' = this year's profit at or above 90% of the best year and at least 1.3× the median
Source: Q3 2026 (net income, trailing twelve months)
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 78.37 a share (price 119.30); 77% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 60.63 to 96.10; across every method the research ran the range is -78 to 260. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 78.37 |
| price | 119.30 |
| terminal value share | +77.3% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / 60.63 / 96.1; WACC / ±1 pt / 68.41 / 93.01; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 67.71 / 90.91; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 73.63 / 83.1 |
| range all methods | -78.47; 259.5 |
the DCF's point value against the share of it that is the terminal value and the value at each input moved by one step (growth ±5 pts, WACC ±1 pt, margin ±3 pts …); the range across every method the research ran
Source: 2026-11-08 (valuation research)
What would explain it innocently
- A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary
- The inputs that matter most are themselves well known (a regulated return, a long contract)
What to look for in the filing
- Which input you believe differs from the research's and why
- What the price implies for growth (the reverse DCF on the fair-value page)
What would show the trap does not apply
- The DCF's value is robust to the terminal growth and discount rate (the range's low end is still above the price)
- The company's cash flows over the next three years track the DCF's early years
Look again: next filing.
J06 A bank's low P/E and high profit = safe Not applicable
not a bank
J08 A REIT's low net income = the dividend is unsafe Not applicable
not a REIT
What the statuses mean
Triggered: the filings show the pattern; read the normal explanations and the missing evidence before concluding anything. To review: one quarter or a weak signal; a reader's judgement, not a pattern. Not triggered: the pattern is absent on these figures. Insufficient data: the filings read so far do not hold what the rule needs; this is not a clean bill. Not applicable: the rule is not meant for this kind of company (a bank's working capital, a loss-making quarter's EPS growth). Out of date: the latest filing is more than fifteen months old.
Severity is what the pattern could mean for cash, value or solvency; confidence is how reliable the inputs and the reading are. The two are kept apart.
Record a view
A reader's judgement, grounds, what would change it and the next review; kept in the browser (needs JavaScript).
Every rule and the companies it triggers on → Incyte: cash flow → Earnings quality score →
Each rule reads the company's own filings by a fixed formula and says what would explain the same figures innocently. A triggered rule is a question to verify, not a finding of manipulation, and not a view on the stock. Missing data is shown as missing, never as clear. Not investment advice.