Latest revenue
$311.4M
as of 2026-03-31
Latest net income
$51.0M
as of 2026-03-31
Net margin
16.4%
as of 2026-03-31
Community sentiment
Where do you think TECH is heading?
Keep private notes on TECH — thesis, target price, catalysts to watch.
Visible only to you. Never shared. Never used to train AI.
TECH vs S&P 500 · rebased to 100
Live market
delayed ≤15 min- Market cap
- $8.52B
- Enterprise value
- $8.54B
- P/E (trailing)
- 116.1×
- Forward P/E
- —
- P/B
- 4.09×
- Dividend yield
- 0.6%
- 52-wk high
- $72.16
- 52-wk low
- $43.20
- Beta
- —
- Shares out
- 156.6M
What this company does
Bio-Techne develops and sells reagents, antibodies, proteins, and instruments used by biotech and pharma researchers for cell biology, diagnostics, and cell-and-gene therapy workflows. It generates revenue primarily from selling these consumables and lab instruments to academic, biopharma, and clinical diagnostic customers globally. Sales are roughly flat year-over-year at $582 million for the half, but margin expansion and aggressive debt paydown ($86 million repaid) show management prioritizing profitability over growth amid a soft life-sciences funding environment.
Generated from TECH's filing dated 2025-08-22
Key risks
- Revenue stagnation: Net sales declined slightly to $295.9M in Q2 FY26 vs $297.0M prior year; six-month sales also down to $582.4M from $586.5M.
- Effective tax rate jumped to 25.2% (H1 FY26) from 17.5% prior year, cutting into earnings growth despite operating income rising 17%.
- Retained earnings dropped sharply to $1.107B from $1.325B (June 2024), reflecting prior heavy buybacks; debt still $260M with reduced repurchase capacity.
Generated from TECH's filing dated 2025-08-22
ActaClear Score
Computed from 5 years of SEC fundamentals + latest market data, ranked within Biological Products, (No Diagnostic Substances) (165 peers). 10 = best in industry, 5 = median, 0 = worst. Refreshed Jun 10, 2026.
Fair value · DCF
Methodology + caveats (click to expand)
Method. 10-year forecast of free cash flow, discounted at the company's WACC, with a Gordon-growth terminal at year 10. FCF is proxied by last fiscal-year net income (proper FCF needs CFO − CapEx by year, which we don't store yet). Beta defaults to 1.0 when not reported.
Why DCF is fragile. Treat the output as a thinking aid, not a verdict. Honest weaknesses of any DCF:
- Growth is the dominant assumption. No one can foresee 10 years of growth — small changes in the slider can double or halve fair value. The reverse-DCF readout above tells you what the market is implicitly assuming; ask yourself whether that's realistic before trusting either number.
- Terminal value dominates. In most DCFs, 60-80% of the answer comes from the terminal-value calculation — i.e., everything AFTER year 10. A 0.5pp change in terminal growth, or in WACC, can swing fair value by 20-30%.
- WACC is itself a guess. We use a textbook CAPM cost of equity (Rf 4.3%, MRP 5.5%, β from the quote) plus a 6% pretax cost of debt — none of these are the company's actual marginal financing cost.
- No moat / disruption modelling. The model assumes the company keeps earning whatever it earns today, compounding cleanly. Competitive shifts, regulatory action, and technology disruption can invalidate the forecast overnight.
- Net income ≠ free cash flow. For capex-heavy names (semis, telcos) net income overstates distributable cash. For low-capex names (software) it understates. Both reduce the precision of the FV figure.
- Reflexivity. A high stock price often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy via better hiring, financing, and customer trust. DCF can't see this.
Take the DCF, the reverse-DCF implied growth, the historical multiples, and the community sentiment together. When they agree, conviction. When they disagree, the disagreement is the most informative thing on the page.
Historical multiples
How does TECH's current valuation compare to its own past?
P/E uses year-end weekly close ÷ (net income ÷ shares outstanding today). Held shares constant at today's count, which understates the per-share earnings improvement from buybacks over the period. PEG uses 5y revenue CAGR as a proxy for EPS growth — close, but not identical (margin expansion or dilution can drive a wedge). Best read as a comparator across companies and industries, not as a precise replica of historical multiples.