Really balanced view @mikebrisy. On the flipside, how many completely failed speculative investments do you need to nab that 10-bagger? I've got a few made as a younger man and yet to make a 10x. Rudi made a comment on a podcast a few weeks ago that really resonated with me as a now-middle aged investor: something to the effect of "you didn't need to buy $XRO at $6 to make good money". Depending on one's risk profile its totally reasonable to let a business prove itself as viable before investing. And statistically, most of the growth companies experience occurs after entry to the ASX200.

Having said that, I'm inclined to take a nibble and potentially DCA on the way up. Telix is further ahead in the pipeline and is making great strategic moves, but I'd buy a hedge against CU6 having a superior product in the long run.

Just quickly want to answer the question on why no one has taken a bite on Clarity

1. Clarity is still in Phase 2 or perhaps earlier stage. The trend is for big pharma companies like to get something that is in late Phase 2 to Phase 3 where there is a lot more data.
2. There is still a few unknowns on the technique and a bit more skepticism in the technology that is very new and radical which goes back to point 1.
3. I haven't taken careful look at holdings, but I thought there was a high level of insider ownership which can be a double-edged sword.

I noticed there was one biotech fund that reduced their holdings around the time I reduced mine. In hindsight, both of us may have acted too early although that parcel was fairly small (basically my initial outlay).

So I think what you are buying now is management and that is what got me here when the market cap was still under 200m. Biggin's track record is also good with that FDA approved drug Xofigo and lots of use cases written on it.

But as they say, past performance or history does not predict future performance. Just merely makes the probability a bit more reassuring.

@Aaronfzr I've heard Rudi say that many times. And he's right. There are lot's of opportunities to get on.... and it is easy to spot them and time them, in hind sight.

But let's say that the $CU6 prostate products both fail (what are the odds,... 20% - 40% from here?). SP goes from $7.67 to $1.00 in the next year, and 3 years advances while they bring forward the next candidate. If the platform is successful, the company might still be worth $50 in 10 years, and you've earned a 20% annual ROI, even though you've not done well for a 5-6 year period by getting the timing wrong.

Personally, I don't like that level of volatility. By contrast, consider $NEU. SP has pulled back 50% on DAYBUE downgrade and short thesis, combined. Still, it's not yet back to my average cost base (and I've cashed some profits along the way). Can it get worse? Potentially, but it's probably going to get a lot better both due to multiple DAYBUE upsides and the potential NNZ-2591 future blockbuster (50% CoS from here) with multiple indications.(The next measurement point for me is the Q3 DAYBUE number.)

Coming back to $CU6. A material pullback would be part of my calculus for $CU6. As you say, DCA on the way up, and equally, if there are upsets but the platform thesis remains intact, top up on material pullbacks - whether through a major macro-correction or just on some bad news. So, my finger is poised on the trigger for the first 1/3rd position (2%).

In healthcare, I've never had anything go to zero. In fact, I've mostly made good returns. But I don't buy at the very speccy stage, and so I don't expect any to go to zero.... or maybe only 1 in 10, because if I am right in my risking, that's what should happen.

Another approach is do the research and buy 20 Stage 1/Stage 2 companies, hoping that 2 or 3 make it to compensate for all the ones that fail. Its perfectly valid and some investors are good at that. I prefer to enter once there is an approved product and even preferrably a revenue stream. Buy at a good price, and ride the growth curve and the follow-on products. (Like buying $XRO at $19.36, and $WTC at $5.33 which is about where I did 8 years ago.)

My reason for choosing to be later to the party in biotech is that, generally speaking, there is more information readily accessible to the diligent retail investor. More published studies, approvals, knowledge of pricing and economics, the beginnings of the s-curve etc. I am more comfortable assessing value and risk when I can see more of these puzzle pieces. That suits my risk appetite. But patience is important because invariably these stocks continue to be volatile even at the later stages, and there is a lot of option value in taking advantage of that volatility.

There are so many different, valid approaches. What's important is to be clear about what kind of investor you are. When we are discussing stocks here it is always important to recognise that members will express views on a stock through the lens of their own risk appetite.