A Biotech Exit & The Weight of Percentages

by

It’s funny, isn’t it, how quickly things become…percentages? I was reviewing some portfolio adjustments—Tanager Wealth Management, a firm I occasionally consult for, mostly to feel useful—and stumbled upon their exit from Centessa Pharmaceuticals. A cool $14.5 million, they offloaded. Which, on paper, sounds substantial. But when you’re staring at spreadsheets all day, it just…blurs into a sea of decimal points. Like trying to count grains of sand at the beach, only the sand is financial risk.

They sold 598,044 shares, if you’re keeping track. I wasn’t. I was more preoccupied with the fact that the barista mispronounced my name again. Priorities, you know? But apparently, this move dropped Centessa’s weighting in Tanager’s portfolio from 1.5% to a flat 0%. It’s like Centessa was a guest at a party, and someone quietly removed their name tag. Efficient, but a little cold.

The bulk of Tanager’s holdings—ITOT, XHLF, VEA, PICB, VTI—are the usual suspects. Broad market ETFs. The financial equivalent of beige paint. Safe, reliable, utterly devoid of personality. I suppose that’s the point. They’re building wealth, not collecting interesting stories. Though, honestly, a little eccentricity wouldn’t hurt.

Centessa, meanwhile, had been on a bit of a run—up 56.7% over the past year. Which, in the current market, is practically a moonshot. It’s the kind of performance that attracts attention, and also, apparently, invites a swift exit. It reminded me of a friend who started a sourdough bread-baking obsession during lockdown. He was churning out loaves that were genuinely impressive, but then he got bored and moved on to competitive birdwatching. Momentum is a fickle thing.

Here’s a table, because everyone loves a good table. I’m not sure why. It’s just a grid of information, but it feels…authoritative. Like we’re getting somewhere.

Metric Value
Price (as of 1/26/26) $25.73
Market Capitalization $3.46 billion
Revenue (TTM) $15.00 million
Net Income (TTM) ($242.70 million)

Centessa, for those unfamiliar, is a clinical-stage biotech company. They’re developing therapies for rare and serious diseases. It’s admirable work, really. Though, if I’m being honest, I struggle to keep track of all the different “stages” of drug development. It feels like a constantly shifting goalpost.

They have a pipeline of potential drugs—Lixivaptan for polycystic kidney disease, SerpinPC for hemophilia, and a bunch of other things with names I can’t pronounce. It’s a diversified approach, which, in theory, reduces risk. But it also means they’re spread a little thin. Like a person trying to juggle too many commitments. Eventually, something’s going to drop.

So, what does this transaction mean for investors? Well, Tanager’s strategy is pretty straightforward. They’re focused on long-term wealth accumulation, not speculative gains. They want to minimize risk and maximize returns. It’s a sensible approach, even if it lacks a certain…drama. They’re content with incremental growth, and that’s perfectly fine. It’s just not my style. I prefer a little chaos, a little unpredictability. A little bit of sourdough bread baking and competitive birdwatching thrown into the mix.

Centessa reported $349 million in cash and investments, and they raised another $250 million from investors in November. They also appointed a new CEO in December. These are all positive signs, of course. But in the world of biotech, positive signs can quickly turn into negative ones. It’s a high-stakes game, and the odds are always stacked against you. Which is why, ultimately, Tanager probably made the right decision. Sometimes, the most sensible thing to do is simply walk away.

Read More

2026-02-02 03:14