Guardant Health
GHNASDAQUSD
- Source valuation snapshot. Not a live recalculation.
- Latest filed annual earnings; price snapshot date unavailable. Not forward P/E.
- Diluted earnings per share from the latest filed annual.
- $155.35 Prior regular-session close from the quote source.
- $153.41–$163.39 Regular-session low and high so far today.
- 1.5M Regular-session shares traded · Nov 11, 4:00 PM ET.
- Not yet confirmed The company has not confirmed its next report date. Reported quarters are available in the chart’s Earnings view.
- $74.55–$191.05 52-week trading low and high returned by the quote source.
Understand the Business
Why the Stock Moved
Period-matched expectations history is not yet available. Current metrics are not a substitute for a historical explanation.
The core investment thesis
Own GH if its FDA- and reimbursement-validated liquid-biopsy platform becomes standard across therapy selection, recurrence monitoring, and colorectal screening while operating losses narrow materially.
GH price history
Loading recent earnings…
Investment thesis
What must happen next
Guardant360’s FDA-approved liquid-biopsy position and companion-diagnostic use cases keep oncologists and biopharma customers routing advanced-cancer profiling to Guardant instead of defaulting entirely to tissue-first or in-house sequencing workflows.StrengtheningMateriality: High
Item 1 says Guardant360 CDx was the first comprehensive liquid biopsy test approved by the FDA for tumor mutation profiling in solid tumors and as a companion diagnostic in NSCLC, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer. If the advanced-oncology channel remains trusted, it provides the installed clinical and biopharma base from which Guardant can cross-sell monitoring and screening; if it erodes, the platform story loses its anchor.
Watch: Foundation Medicine, Tempus, or another liquid-biopsy competitor wins broader companion-diagnostic labels or national payer policies that shift oncologist ordering away from Guardant360.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Item 1 says Guardant360 CDx was the first comprehensive liquid biopsy test approved by the FDA for tumor mutation profiling.
Open source ↗Shield’s differentiation comes from reducing friction in colorectal cancer screening through a blood test that already has FDA approval, Medicare coverage eligibility, and NCCN guideline inclusion, allowing Guardant to reach unscreened average-risk adults through primary-care channels.HoldingMateriality: High
Item 1 says Shield is the first FDA-approved blood test for primary colorectal cancer screening and the first blood test for colorectal cancer screening that meets Medicare coverage requirements. Shield is the biggest expansion vector; if it becomes a reimbursed primary-care habit, Guardant’s addressable market changes materially, but if adoption stalls the valuation loses its main upside leg.
Watch: CMS or commercial payers restrict blood-based colorectal screening reimbursement or set payment rates that make primary-care selling uneconomic.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Item 1 says Shield is the first FDA-approved blood test for primary colorectal cancer screening and the first blood test.
Open source ↗Guardant’s accumulated test data, Smart Platform, and InfinityAI/GuardantINFORM analytics can make it a recurring partner for biopharma companies by helping them study tumor evolution, resistance, immune response, and biomarker-defined cancers.StrengtheningMateriality: Medium
Item 1 says Guardant collaborates with biopharmaceutical companies in clinical studies using tests including GuardantINFINITY, GuardantOMNI, and other products. A durable biopharma data-and-testing flywheel would make Guardant more than a commodity lab and support premium gross profit; if pharma shifts elsewhere, the data moat weakens.
Watch: Biopharma sponsors move trial testing and real-world datasets to Foundation Medicine, Tempus, Caris, or internal sequencing and analytics platforms.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Item 1 says Guardant collaborates with biopharmaceutical companies in clinical studies using tests including GuardantINFINITY, GuardantOMNI, and other products.
Open source ↗Broad payer coverage, reimbursement, and disciplined product/customer mix must keep average selling prices and cost per sample moving in Guardant’s favor as volumes scale.StrengtheningMateriality: Medium
MD&A identifies testing volume, pricing, product and customer mix, average selling price per sample, and cost per sample as key drivers of revenue and cost of revenue. Revenue growth is valuable only if each additional test carries attractive gross profit; otherwise screening growth could dilute economics.
Watch: Commercial payers impose prior authorization, lower reimbursement rates, or narrower coverage for liquid-biopsy and screening tests.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
MD&A identifies testing volume, pricing, product and customer mix, average selling price per sample, and cost per sample as key.
Open source ↗Guardant must convert its existing regulatory, lab, data, and commercial infrastructure into scale economies, so new test adoption does not require proportional increases in R&D, sales, clinical-evidence, and lab spending.HoldingMateriality: Medium
Annual GAAP operating loss improved slightly from $443.6 million in FY2024 to $437.2 million in FY2025 while annual GAAP revenue grew 32.9%. This is the bridge from a valuable clinical platform to per-share value creation; if losses do not narrow with scale, shareholders own growth without earnings power.
Watch: The Shield launch requires sustained direct-to-consumer marketing, primary-care education, and phlebotomy spending that scales with volume rather than leveraging existing oncology infrastructure.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Annual GAAP operating loss improved slightly from $443.6 million in FY2024 to $437.2 million in FY2025 while annual GAAP revenue.
Open source ↗Guardant’s liquidity must be sufficient to fund commercialization and clinical evidence generation until operating cash burn narrows enough to avoid value-destructive financing.HoldingMateriality: Medium
MD&A says Guardant had approximately $1.3 billion of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and marketable debt securities as of December 31, 2025. Even if the products work clinically, shareholders can be diluted or structurally impaired if the company has to fund years of losses on unfavorable terms.
Watch: Operating cash burn reaccelerates because Shield, lung screening, or multi-cancer detection commercialization requires spending ahead of reimbursement.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
MD&A says Guardant had approximately $1.3 billion of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and marketable debt securities as of December.
Open source ↗
Full investment case & evidence
Loading the original research archive…
Original research
Guardant360’s FDA-approved liquid-biopsy position and companion-diagnostic use cases keep oncologists and biopharma customers routing advanced-cancer profiling to Guardant instead of defaulting entirely to tissue-first or in-house sequencing workflows. If the advanced-oncology channel remains trusted, it provides the installed clinical and biopharma base from which Guardant can cross-sell monitoring and screening; if it erodes, the platform story loses its anchor.
Shield’s differentiation comes from reducing friction in colorectal cancer screening through a blood test that already has FDA approval, Medicare coverage eligibility, and NCCN guideline inclusion, allowing Guardant to reach unscreened average-risk adults through primary-care channels. Shield is the biggest expansion vector; if it becomes a reimbursed primary-care habit, Guardant’s addressable market changes materially, but if adoption stalls the valuation loses its main upside leg.
Guardant’s accumulated test data, Smart Platform, and InfinityAI/GuardantINFORM analytics can make it a recurring partner for biopharma companies by helping them study tumor evolution, resistance, immune response, and biomarker-defined cancers. A durable biopharma data-and-testing flywheel would make Guardant more than a commodity lab and support premium gross profit; if pharma shifts elsewhere, the data moat weakens.
Broad payer coverage, reimbursement, and disciplined product/customer mix must keep average selling prices and cost per sample moving in Guardant’s favor as volumes scale. Revenue growth is valuable only if each additional test carries attractive gross profit; otherwise screening growth could dilute economics.
Guardant must convert its existing regulatory, lab, data, and commercial infrastructure into scale economies, so new test adoption does not require proportional increases in R&D, sales, clinical-evidence, and lab spending. This is the bridge from a valuable clinical platform to per-share value creation; if losses do not narrow with scale, shareholders own growth without earnings power.
Guardant’s liquidity must be sufficient to fund commercialization and clinical evidence generation until operating cash burn narrows enough to avoid value-destructive financing. Even if the products work clinically, shareholders can be diluted or structurally impaired if the company has to fund years of losses on unfavorable terms.
All standing thesis claims
Original report summary
its FDA- and reimbursement-validated liquid-biopsy platform becomes standard across therapy selection, recurrence monitoring, and colorectal screening while operating losses narrow materially.
Bull case and bear case
Bull case and bear case for Guardant Health
Where the evidence on Guardant Health stands: Holding on the latest evidence (Nov 10, 2026). Of its 6 thesis points, 3 strengthening and 3 holding.
Bull case: what the evidence supports
Guardant360’s FDA-approved liquid-biopsy position and companion-diagnostic use cases keep oncologists and biopharma customers routing advanced-cancer profiling to Guardant instead of defaulting entirely to tissue-first or in-house sequencing workflows.
Shield’s differentiation comes from reducing friction in colorectal cancer screening through a blood test that already has FDA approval, Medicare coverage eligibility, and NCCN guideline inclusion, allowing Guardant to reach unscreened average-risk adults through primary-care channels.
Guardant’s accumulated test data, Smart Platform, and InfinityAI/GuardantINFORM analytics can make it a recurring partner for biopharma companies by helping them study tumor evolution, resistance, immune response, and biomarker-defined cancers.
Broad payer coverage, reimbursement, and disciplined product/customer mix must keep average selling prices and cost per sample moving in Guardant’s favor as volumes scale.
Guardant must convert its existing regulatory, lab, data, and commercial infrastructure into scale economies, so new test adoption does not require proportional increases in R&D, sales, clinical-evidence, and lab spending.
Guardant’s liquidity must be sufficient to fund commercialization and clinical evidence generation until operating cash burn narrows enough to avoid value-destructive financing.
Bear case: what would count against it
Foundation Medicine, Tempus, or another liquid-biopsy competitor wins broader companion-diagnostic labels or national payer policies that shift oncologist ordering away from Guardant360.
CMS or commercial payers restrict blood-based colorectal screening reimbursement or set payment rates that make primary-care selling uneconomic.
Biopharma sponsors move trial testing and real-world datasets to Foundation Medicine, Tempus, Caris, or internal sequencing and analytics platforms.
Thesis-Break Engine
What has broken in Guardant Health’s thesis
Each break OptimistFi flagged on Guardant Health, dated — with what has historically followed the same kind of break across the market, not a forecast for Guardant Health.
- CEO / officer changecondition set before this filing
Across all companies, this kind of break has happened 16,849 times before. Those stocks trailed comparable companies by a median of 2% over the next six months, and 38% of them trailed it by 10 points or more.
- Insider-selling clustercondition set before this filing
Across all companies, this kind of break has happened 9,137 times before. Those stocks beat comparable companies by a median of 1% over the next six months, and 30% of them trailed it by 10 points or more.
Several kinds of break have stacked on Guardant Health at once. A cluster is a stronger read than any one signal alone.
MARKET + FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT
The numbers behind the thesis
What Changed
- MixedReported results of operations (earnings release).
Guardant Health filed an SEC 8-K on 2026-11-05: Reported results of operations (earnings release). It is a dated development that tests the current thesis.
- MixedDirector or principal officer change.
Guardant Health filed an SEC 8-K on 2026-11-03: Director or principal officer change. It is a dated development that tests the current thesis.
- MixedReported results of operations (earnings release).
Guardant Health filed an SEC 8-K on 2026-07-30: Reported results of operations (earnings release). It is a dated development that tests the current thesis.
Risks / falsifiers
What could break the thesis
- Foundation Medicine, Tempus, or another liquid-biopsy competitor wins broader companion-diagnostic labels or national payer policies that shift oncologist ordering away from Guardant360.
- CMS or commercial payers restrict blood-based colorectal screening reimbursement or set payment rates that make primary-care selling uneconomic.
- Biopharma sponsors move trial testing and real-world datasets to Foundation Medicine, Tempus, Caris, or internal sequencing and analytics platforms.
- Commercial payers impose prior authorization, lower reimbursement rates, or narrower coverage for liquid-biopsy and screening tests.
- The Shield launch requires sustained direct-to-consumer marketing, primary-care education, and phlebotomy spending that scales with volume rather than leveraging existing oncology infrastructure.
- Operating cash burn reaccelerates because Shield, lung screening, or multi-cancer detection commercialization requires spending ahead of reimbursement.
GH news
Loading headlines…
Financial statements
GH income statement
Annual filed results · USD · Oldest to newest. Margins are calculated from the reported figures.
GH: quick answers
- Have members of Congress traded GH?
- Reports made public in the last 90 days disclose 1 trade in GH by 1 filer: 1 purchase and 0 sales. They are filed under the STOCK Act by members of Congress, the President and senior officials. Every disclosed GH trade
- Which well-known investors own GH?
- 2 of the 37 well-known funds tracked here reported GH shares in their latest 13F filings. By share of the fund's portfolio: ARK Investment Management (Cathie Wood), 0.5%; Bridgewater Associates (Ray Dalio), 0.0%. Fund portfolios
GH in well-known investors’ portfolios
2 of 37 funds reported GH shares in their latest 13F filing. A 13F shows quarter-end positions and arrives up to 45 days later.
| Fund | Of its portfolio | Value | Change | Quarter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cathie WoodARK Investment Management | 0.49% | $76.0M | +4.1% | Q2 2026 |
| Ray DalioBridgewater Associates | 0.00% | $637K | −68.2% | Q2 2026 |
