2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
80 päivää sitten
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·8 t sittenREAD THIS ABOUT THE TOP-5 STUDY. IT IS BIGGER THAN PEOPLE REALIZE. 🧬🔑 Let me break down what this deal actually is — because most people completely underestimate it. One of the world's five largest pharmaceutical companies is paying themselves to test circVec. In vivo. In CNS — the most difficult area there is. 🧠 They are using their own money, their own resources, on Circio's technology. And here's the key people are missing: 🔑 This is not a random test. The *stated intention* — if the study delivers — is a licensing agreement. It's not speculation; it's the framework the company itself has set for what this can become. Feasibility first, license if it works. Think about what such a structure actually means: → The partner has already taken a first step — from in vitro to in vivo. Every step they continue, is a signal that they see something worth pursuing. 📈 → The cost is borne by them. Circio retains the rights until it is eventually converted. Non-dilutive validation. 💰 → And if it succeeds? Then we're talking milestones + royalty — the type of deal that re-rates the entire platform, not just one program. The big point: this is not "maybe one day we'll meet someone interesting". The process is already underway, with one of the heaviest players in the industry, with a clear path towards a commercial agreement if the data holds up. 🎯 One license from a top-5 player doesn't just validate one program. It validates the entire circVec. And then the rest of the industry looks at Circio with completely new eyes. We don't have the deal yet. But we have something most early platforms only dream of: a giant who has already sat down at the table — and who is paying to stay seated. 🧱 We know what we own. ♟️🧱🍷
You forget one thing. The CEO said in the latest podcast that BP had tested and wanted to try something that Erik himself didn't believe in. It turned out to work and perhaps can open other doors. BUT, this could also mean that BP wanted to test something else because their original plan and test didn't work so well. As you say, this is a difficult track. The question is whether news that the initiated test didn't work will give us a negative trend or if these new discoveries outweigh any failed first attempt. It's pure speculation, but I doubt I'm the only one who might have interpreted the latest podcast this way.
·12 t sittenOn the contrary, it shows that several professional investors believe the technology has potential. The company raised around 300 million kroner in a financing round to further develop its circRNA-platform, and in total they raised around 620 million kroner in the first half of 2026. At the same time, it is important to remember: * Large investments are no guarantee that the stock will rise. * Biotech companies have high risk, and many do not succeed with development. * The investors who participated know that they can lose large parts of their investment if the technology or clinical results do not deliver. So, 300 million kroner in new capital is a positive signal of confidence, but not proof that the stock is cheap or will provide a high return. If you own Circio, I can also provide an assessment of what could drive the share price up or down in the next 6–12 months.
Are you the one who is AI, vidfar? I think you need to take a break. Go for a long walk and get some fresh air. It will do you good 😉
·13 t sittenReading this now in Finansavisen, Was there anyone here who was in this? https://www.finansavisen.no/helse/2026/07/03/8363321/milliardene-glapp-for-karl-johan-jakola-i-prophylix-legger-ned-selskap-etter-testfiasko How would a message look if the heart testing that Circio is currently doing turned out wrong? How much will such a message affect the share price? Great if someone who has been involved in this comments.
Yes, this is part of the package. I haven't experienced such losses, but one must be aware of the risk. When someone in here expects every piece of news and data to always be positive, they have misunderstood. It's clear that Circio itself communicates that they have great faith in what they are developing - anything else would be absurd. But they don't decide what results they will get - they test and research. Many ignore that uncertainty, which we see, among other things, in posts stating that "the market and everyone else" doesn't know or understand what the case is about. The risk in this case is reflected in the share price. Yes, it can take off. But no, it's not the most likely scenario that it will happen. Then the share price wouldn't have danced between 7 and 8 kroner. I'm crossing my fingers for my sake and everyone else's, but I get a bit exasperated by the newly converted missionaries. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but few want to die, to paraphrase a Swede.
·22 t sittenA bit of speculative reading material for the weekend. A detailed timeline with own research mixed with GreatResets. Why it is most likely Eli Lilly behind the feasibility study.... April 2025 Eli Lilly licenses Sangamo's STAC-BBB AAV-capsid for CNS. (Central Nervous System/brain) A capsid that can finally cross the blood-brain barrier. The technology transfer proceeds relatively quickly, and Eli Lilly is now responsible for research, preclinical development, clinical studies, production, and commercialization. ....but something is missing May 2025 ASGCT Circio presents new in vivo data at the world's most important conference for gene and cell therapy. Data shows that circVec significantly improves gene expression from AAV and has the potential to increase efficacy and durability in gene therapy. Summer/Autumn 2025 Big Pharma evaluates new technologies presented at ASGCT. If Eli Lilly has just secured a CNS-AAV-capsid, a technology that can improve AAV expression would be obvious to investigate. October 2025 Circio publishes even stronger AAV data with up to 40 times higher gene expression in the heart than conventional AAV systems. November 2025 Circio announces a fully funded feasibility study with an anonymous Big Pharma. The study includes: AAV, CNS, one specific disease and no obligations yet. Shortly after: Alex Ward (Director, AAV at Eli Lilly and formerly Sangamo) reacts to Circio's post about new AAV results. Before Lilly, he worked at Sangamo Therapeutics as Director for Vector Production and Development, where he was part of the work on the company's AAV platforms. Alex Ward was also a co-author on several scientific abstracts on the development of BBB-penetrating AAV capsids for CNS, including work on the selection and optimization of capsids to cross the blood-brain barrier. Of course, it's just a reaction, but why him? Why him, who knew about and worked with precisely the technology that Lilly later licensed, which then suddenly lacked a counterpart with a high protein expression platform - a small, lesser-known company with under 15 employees? Coincidence? I actually don't know 💰It will proceed differently in Circio, which is publicly traded. It's not just about throwing out a bid when the ownership stakes are so spread out as here. One would likely have seen an accumulation of shares from foreign brokerage firms or similar. Something we haven't seen yet.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
80 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·8 t sittenREAD THIS ABOUT THE TOP-5 STUDY. IT IS BIGGER THAN PEOPLE REALIZE. 🧬🔑 Let me break down what this deal actually is — because most people completely underestimate it. One of the world's five largest pharmaceutical companies is paying themselves to test circVec. In vivo. In CNS — the most difficult area there is. 🧠 They are using their own money, their own resources, on Circio's technology. And here's the key people are missing: 🔑 This is not a random test. The *stated intention* — if the study delivers — is a licensing agreement. It's not speculation; it's the framework the company itself has set for what this can become. Feasibility first, license if it works. Think about what such a structure actually means: → The partner has already taken a first step — from in vitro to in vivo. Every step they continue, is a signal that they see something worth pursuing. 📈 → The cost is borne by them. Circio retains the rights until it is eventually converted. Non-dilutive validation. 💰 → And if it succeeds? Then we're talking milestones + royalty — the type of deal that re-rates the entire platform, not just one program. The big point: this is not "maybe one day we'll meet someone interesting". The process is already underway, with one of the heaviest players in the industry, with a clear path towards a commercial agreement if the data holds up. 🎯 One license from a top-5 player doesn't just validate one program. It validates the entire circVec. And then the rest of the industry looks at Circio with completely new eyes. We don't have the deal yet. But we have something most early platforms only dream of: a giant who has already sat down at the table — and who is paying to stay seated. 🧱 We know what we own. ♟️🧱🍷You forget one thing. The CEO said in the latest podcast that BP had tested and wanted to try something that Erik himself didn't believe in. It turned out to work and perhaps can open other doors. BUT, this could also mean that BP wanted to test something else because their original plan and test didn't work so well. As you say, this is a difficult track. The question is whether news that the initiated test didn't work will give us a negative trend or if these new discoveries outweigh any failed first attempt. It's pure speculation, but I doubt I'm the only one who might have interpreted the latest podcast this way.
- ·12 t sittenOn the contrary, it shows that several professional investors believe the technology has potential. The company raised around 300 million kroner in a financing round to further develop its circRNA-platform, and in total they raised around 620 million kroner in the first half of 2026. At the same time, it is important to remember: * Large investments are no guarantee that the stock will rise. * Biotech companies have high risk, and many do not succeed with development. * The investors who participated know that they can lose large parts of their investment if the technology or clinical results do not deliver. So, 300 million kroner in new capital is a positive signal of confidence, but not proof that the stock is cheap or will provide a high return. If you own Circio, I can also provide an assessment of what could drive the share price up or down in the next 6–12 months.Are you the one who is AI, vidfar? I think you need to take a break. Go for a long walk and get some fresh air. It will do you good 😉
- ·13 t sittenReading this now in Finansavisen, Was there anyone here who was in this? https://www.finansavisen.no/helse/2026/07/03/8363321/milliardene-glapp-for-karl-johan-jakola-i-prophylix-legger-ned-selskap-etter-testfiasko How would a message look if the heart testing that Circio is currently doing turned out wrong? How much will such a message affect the share price? Great if someone who has been involved in this comments.Yes, this is part of the package. I haven't experienced such losses, but one must be aware of the risk. When someone in here expects every piece of news and data to always be positive, they have misunderstood. It's clear that Circio itself communicates that they have great faith in what they are developing - anything else would be absurd. But they don't decide what results they will get - they test and research. Many ignore that uncertainty, which we see, among other things, in posts stating that "the market and everyone else" doesn't know or understand what the case is about. The risk in this case is reflected in the share price. Yes, it can take off. But no, it's not the most likely scenario that it will happen. Then the share price wouldn't have danced between 7 and 8 kroner. I'm crossing my fingers for my sake and everyone else's, but I get a bit exasperated by the newly converted missionaries. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but few want to die, to paraphrase a Swede.
- ·22 t sittenA bit of speculative reading material for the weekend. A detailed timeline with own research mixed with GreatResets. Why it is most likely Eli Lilly behind the feasibility study.... April 2025 Eli Lilly licenses Sangamo's STAC-BBB AAV-capsid for CNS. (Central Nervous System/brain) A capsid that can finally cross the blood-brain barrier. The technology transfer proceeds relatively quickly, and Eli Lilly is now responsible for research, preclinical development, clinical studies, production, and commercialization. ....but something is missing May 2025 ASGCT Circio presents new in vivo data at the world's most important conference for gene and cell therapy. Data shows that circVec significantly improves gene expression from AAV and has the potential to increase efficacy and durability in gene therapy. Summer/Autumn 2025 Big Pharma evaluates new technologies presented at ASGCT. If Eli Lilly has just secured a CNS-AAV-capsid, a technology that can improve AAV expression would be obvious to investigate. October 2025 Circio publishes even stronger AAV data with up to 40 times higher gene expression in the heart than conventional AAV systems. November 2025 Circio announces a fully funded feasibility study with an anonymous Big Pharma. The study includes: AAV, CNS, one specific disease and no obligations yet. Shortly after: Alex Ward (Director, AAV at Eli Lilly and formerly Sangamo) reacts to Circio's post about new AAV results. Before Lilly, he worked at Sangamo Therapeutics as Director for Vector Production and Development, where he was part of the work on the company's AAV platforms. Alex Ward was also a co-author on several scientific abstracts on the development of BBB-penetrating AAV capsids for CNS, including work on the selection and optimization of capsids to cross the blood-brain barrier. Of course, it's just a reaction, but why him? Why him, who knew about and worked with precisely the technology that Lilly later licensed, which then suddenly lacked a counterpart with a high protein expression platform - a small, lesser-known company with under 15 employees? Coincidence? I actually don't know 💰It will proceed differently in Circio, which is publicly traded. It's not just about throwing out a bid when the ownership stakes are so spread out as here. One would likely have seen an accumulation of shares from foreign brokerage firms or similar. Something we haven't seen yet.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
80 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·8 t sittenREAD THIS ABOUT THE TOP-5 STUDY. IT IS BIGGER THAN PEOPLE REALIZE. 🧬🔑 Let me break down what this deal actually is — because most people completely underestimate it. One of the world's five largest pharmaceutical companies is paying themselves to test circVec. In vivo. In CNS — the most difficult area there is. 🧠 They are using their own money, their own resources, on Circio's technology. And here's the key people are missing: 🔑 This is not a random test. The *stated intention* — if the study delivers — is a licensing agreement. It's not speculation; it's the framework the company itself has set for what this can become. Feasibility first, license if it works. Think about what such a structure actually means: → The partner has already taken a first step — from in vitro to in vivo. Every step they continue, is a signal that they see something worth pursuing. 📈 → The cost is borne by them. Circio retains the rights until it is eventually converted. Non-dilutive validation. 💰 → And if it succeeds? Then we're talking milestones + royalty — the type of deal that re-rates the entire platform, not just one program. The big point: this is not "maybe one day we'll meet someone interesting". The process is already underway, with one of the heaviest players in the industry, with a clear path towards a commercial agreement if the data holds up. 🎯 One license from a top-5 player doesn't just validate one program. It validates the entire circVec. And then the rest of the industry looks at Circio with completely new eyes. We don't have the deal yet. But we have something most early platforms only dream of: a giant who has already sat down at the table — and who is paying to stay seated. 🧱 We know what we own. ♟️🧱🍷You forget one thing. The CEO said in the latest podcast that BP had tested and wanted to try something that Erik himself didn't believe in. It turned out to work and perhaps can open other doors. BUT, this could also mean that BP wanted to test something else because their original plan and test didn't work so well. As you say, this is a difficult track. The question is whether news that the initiated test didn't work will give us a negative trend or if these new discoveries outweigh any failed first attempt. It's pure speculation, but I doubt I'm the only one who might have interpreted the latest podcast this way.
- ·12 t sittenOn the contrary, it shows that several professional investors believe the technology has potential. The company raised around 300 million kroner in a financing round to further develop its circRNA-platform, and in total they raised around 620 million kroner in the first half of 2026. At the same time, it is important to remember: * Large investments are no guarantee that the stock will rise. * Biotech companies have high risk, and many do not succeed with development. * The investors who participated know that they can lose large parts of their investment if the technology or clinical results do not deliver. So, 300 million kroner in new capital is a positive signal of confidence, but not proof that the stock is cheap or will provide a high return. If you own Circio, I can also provide an assessment of what could drive the share price up or down in the next 6–12 months.Are you the one who is AI, vidfar? I think you need to take a break. Go for a long walk and get some fresh air. It will do you good 😉
- ·13 t sittenReading this now in Finansavisen, Was there anyone here who was in this? https://www.finansavisen.no/helse/2026/07/03/8363321/milliardene-glapp-for-karl-johan-jakola-i-prophylix-legger-ned-selskap-etter-testfiasko How would a message look if the heart testing that Circio is currently doing turned out wrong? How much will such a message affect the share price? Great if someone who has been involved in this comments.Yes, this is part of the package. I haven't experienced such losses, but one must be aware of the risk. When someone in here expects every piece of news and data to always be positive, they have misunderstood. It's clear that Circio itself communicates that they have great faith in what they are developing - anything else would be absurd. But they don't decide what results they will get - they test and research. Many ignore that uncertainty, which we see, among other things, in posts stating that "the market and everyone else" doesn't know or understand what the case is about. The risk in this case is reflected in the share price. Yes, it can take off. But no, it's not the most likely scenario that it will happen. Then the share price wouldn't have danced between 7 and 8 kroner. I'm crossing my fingers for my sake and everyone else's, but I get a bit exasperated by the newly converted missionaries. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but few want to die, to paraphrase a Swede.
- ·22 t sittenA bit of speculative reading material for the weekend. A detailed timeline with own research mixed with GreatResets. Why it is most likely Eli Lilly behind the feasibility study.... April 2025 Eli Lilly licenses Sangamo's STAC-BBB AAV-capsid for CNS. (Central Nervous System/brain) A capsid that can finally cross the blood-brain barrier. The technology transfer proceeds relatively quickly, and Eli Lilly is now responsible for research, preclinical development, clinical studies, production, and commercialization. ....but something is missing May 2025 ASGCT Circio presents new in vivo data at the world's most important conference for gene and cell therapy. Data shows that circVec significantly improves gene expression from AAV and has the potential to increase efficacy and durability in gene therapy. Summer/Autumn 2025 Big Pharma evaluates new technologies presented at ASGCT. If Eli Lilly has just secured a CNS-AAV-capsid, a technology that can improve AAV expression would be obvious to investigate. October 2025 Circio publishes even stronger AAV data with up to 40 times higher gene expression in the heart than conventional AAV systems. November 2025 Circio announces a fully funded feasibility study with an anonymous Big Pharma. The study includes: AAV, CNS, one specific disease and no obligations yet. Shortly after: Alex Ward (Director, AAV at Eli Lilly and formerly Sangamo) reacts to Circio's post about new AAV results. Before Lilly, he worked at Sangamo Therapeutics as Director for Vector Production and Development, where he was part of the work on the company's AAV platforms. Alex Ward was also a co-author on several scientific abstracts on the development of BBB-penetrating AAV capsids for CNS, including work on the selection and optimization of capsids to cross the blood-brain barrier. Of course, it's just a reaction, but why him? Why him, who knew about and worked with precisely the technology that Lilly later licensed, which then suddenly lacked a counterpart with a high protein expression platform - a small, lesser-known company with under 15 employees? Coincidence? I actually don't know 💰It will proceed differently in Circio, which is publicly traded. It's not just about throwing out a bid when the ownership stakes are so spread out as here. One would likely have seen an accumulation of shares from foreign brokerage firms or similar. Something we haven't seen yet.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt