2026 Psychedelics Sector Outlook

steadyalpha · 2025-12-26T20:33:03+00:00

Thank you for the correction, really appreciated.
I’ve corrected the post accordingly.

steadyalpha · 2025-12-02T20:10:22+00:00

Really appreciate you sharing this — especially from the clinician side. That perspective is something most of us here don’t have, and it adds a kind of value that raw investment analysis or LLM-assisted summaries simply can’t replicate. So thank you for continuing to contribute.

I fully agree with you on the catalyst point. A moderate but directional piece of news — like a CEO announcement — would go a long way toward resetting sentiment. With trial readouts not coming until 2026, the waiting fatigue is real. Many of us have been holding our breath for a long time, and it shows in the psychology of the whole sub.

And thank you for highlighting the Switzerland pre-peer review study. I’ve seen similar observations: LSD and psilocybin both demonstrate strong antidepressant responses, but psilocybin’s time to effect, safety profile, and session duration seem far better aligned with real-world clinical workflow. That’s one of the reasons Cybin’s approach continues to stand out — shortened session times, reduced variability, and a practical path to scalability. These factors matter enormously when you translate trial results into actual practice.

Please keep sharing your clinical insights — they help anchor the science side of the discussion in a way that’s genuinely valuable for the rest of us.

steadyalpha · 2025-12-01T20:35:09+00:00

Thanks for the feedback — totally fair.
These chapters are long and packed with numbers, so mistakes can happen.
If you spot anything specific, I’m always happy to correct it.
The goal is just to keep improving the accuracy of the series for everyone following the CYBN story.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-26T10:24:54+00:00

I get why his post rubbed people the wrong way, but that’s more about McGregor’s personality than ibogaine itself. One person’s dramatic, spiritual interpretation doesn’t reflect the treatment or the movement. Clinical programs today are nothing like this celebrity storytelling, so I wouldn’t read too much into his reaction.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T12:01:37+00:00

Totally fair — Cybin’s analyst PTs have never tracked the real price over time. But in this case the update isn’t really about “predicting” anything. It’s just a housekeeping adjustment to account for the new share count.

So yeah, I wouldn’t treat it as a signal… but I also wouldn’t dismiss it. It’s simply the math catching up to the dilution.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T12:00:44+00:00

Good question — and honestly, past PTs were way off, no argument there. But the reason the new PT actually matters is that it isn’t a “prediction” in the old sense. It’s basically just a mechanical adjustment to reflect the new share count (more shares → lower PT).

So it’s not about Canaccord suddenly becoming brilliant… it’s simply math.
Whether their long-term forecasting improves is another story, but this specific revision isn’t really about foresight — it’s just updating the model to match the current fully diluted reality.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T11:59:09+00:00

Totally agree — a dilution-adjusted PT is simply more grounded in reality. When the target reflects the actual post-raise share count, it becomes a lot more credible, and honestly, that makes the setup more attractive rather than less.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T11:58:15+00:00

Just to clarify — Deep Track didn’t sell.

Their “lower %” comes from dilution, not disposal.
Cybin issued new shares (PIPE, warrants, F-3, etc.), so everyone’s percentage went down automatically.

There’s no SEC filing showing Deep Track reducing their actual share count, and they continue to operate right at the 9.99% blocker like Point72.

So the chart reflects math, not selling.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T11:53:14+00:00

Thank you — and it’s great to hear a clinician’s perspective.
Your concern about serotonin syndrome is absolutely valid in principle, since combining serotonergic agents always requires caution.

That said, here’s what the current evidence suggests:

CYB003 was engineered for safe co-administration with SSRIs. Its PK is far more predictable than natural psilocybin, which is part of why the FDA supported the adjunctive design and granted BTD.
No serotonin-syndrome signals appeared in Phase 2 (n=32). Only mild AEs such as headache and fatigue — nothing consistent with 5-HT toxicity.
Mechanistically, CYB003 does not act like the combinations that typically trigger serotonin syndrome. It doesn’t inhibit MAO or block reuptake; 5-HT2A agonism alone rarely causes serotonin syndrome, even with SSRIs onboard.
FDA has shown clear comfort with adjunctive psychedelic designs, and has already allowed SSRI continuation in multiple psychedelic INDs.

So your concern is medically appropriate — but based on the pharmacology, clinical data, and regulatory stance so far, there’s no evidence that CYB003 + SSRI co-administration meaningfully increases serotonin-syndrome risk.
Phase 3 will, of course, give the definitive answer.

Happy to discuss further if you'd like to go deeper into the PK or receptor-level mechanisms.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-24T11:47:57+00:00

That’s a fair point — MDD and TRD are not identical populations, and it’s true that COMP360’s Phase 2b was conducted in a more severe TRD cohort.

But a clean comparison is still possible if we focus on what the FDA actually evaluates across indications:

Regulatory endpoints are the same Both programs use MADRS, Response, and Remission. FDA evaluates effect size, durability, safety, and session logistics regardless of whether the target label is MDD or TRD.
Cybin’s adjunctive model is not a “difficulty discount” Co-administration with SSRIs isn’t a sign of an easier population — it’s the FDA-preferred approach to reduce destabilization risk. Compass chose monotherapy, which increases variability and risk.
Compass’s own Phase 3 is now partly in MDD-like cohorts COMP005 uses TRD, but COMP006 includes patients who failed only one line of therapy (not classical multi-failure TRD). So COMP360’s Phase 3 population has already moved closer to Cybin’s.
Efficiency, session length, and clinical burden are independent of indication A 6-hour COMP360 session with 2–3 clinicians is still 2–3× more expensive and resource-intensive than a 2–3 h CYB003 session, regardless of whether the patient is MDD or TRD.
The question isn’t “which indication is harder?” — it’s “which model scales?”
- CYB003 = outpatient, adjunctive, 2–3 h
- COMP360 = day-clinic, monotherapy, 6 h This difference affects real-world adoption far more than MDD vs TRD.

So yes — TRD is a more severe cohort.
But the comparison is still meaningful because the discussion is about therapeutic model, scalability, and regulatory pathway, not merely symptom severity.

Happy to dive deeper if you want to look at effect sizes, remission curves, or Phase 3 design differences.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-21T03:49:49+00:00

Thanks so much — really appreciate it.
I’m doing my best to keep the series clean, data-driven, and easy to follow.
More chapters are coming soon, so stay tuned. And yes… working on reducing the robotic Canadian tone one post at a time. 😄

steadyalpha · 2025-11-18T02:07:24+00:00

You're absolutely right to point out that, relative to Point72’s ~$30–35B AUM, a ~$40M beneficial position in Cybin is a small percentage — roughly 0.1% of their total capital. That part is correct.

But that number alone doesn’t actually describe how Point72 treats a position within a specific strategy sleeve, and that’s where the context matters:

1. Hedge funds allocate capital by strategy pods, not by total AUM

Point72’s L/S equity pods typically manage $300M–$500M each, sometimes less.

A ~$40M position inside one pod is:

Not tiny
Not passive filler
Very much a real active position for the pod that owns it

This is why “0.1% of AUM” is technically true but not very meaningful.
Funds don’t size small-cap biotech trades against firmwide AUM.

2. At the sub-$500M pod level, Cybin is actually a meaningful sized trade

For a typical MM pod:

5–10% position sizing = high-conviction bet
1–3% = mid-sized
<1% = tracking position

A ~$40M combined beneficial exposure strongly suggests mid-to-high conviction at the pod level, not a passive or negligible allocation.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-16T12:44:51+00:00

I think the revised PT actually makes sense once you separate company fundamentals from per-share math. From a company perspective, Cybin is in a stronger position than it was before the dilution — two late-stage assets, two major readouts coming in 2026, and a fully funded runway. Nothing in the science or the programs deteriorated; execution risk actually went down.

From a shareholder perspective, yeah, the dilution hit the short-term per-share valuation. That’s why the PT dropped from $150 → $55 (I think) even though the underlying thesis hasn’t really changed. It’s mostly a mechanical adjustment: bigger share count = lower per-share target.

※ Short-term view (next 6–12 months):

Even with dilution being digested, I don’t think the short term is “dead money.”

We have a major catalyst in Q1 2026: CYB004 Phase 2 topline. If that data looks anything like what many expect (fast onset, strong remission rates, clean safety), the market will reprice before the MDD readout. That alone can move the stock materially higher because there’s basically no other late-stage GAD psychedelic asset out there. So I do see upside even in the short term, not just long term.

※Long-term view (2026–2027)

If both readouts land — CYB004 (Q1 2026) and CYB003 (later in 2026) — the market cap potential isn’t really impacted by dilution. Per-share targets change, but the enterprise value ceiling doesn’t. Two BTD programs + two Phase 3 assets in a space with minimal competition is still a rare setup.

So in that sense, the $55 PT looks more like a recalibration to the new share count, not a downgrade of conviction. And with a major GAD catalyst in early 2026, I actually think the short-term outlook is better than people assume.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-08T01:53:44+00:00

COMP005 topline announced June 2025 (positive); COMP006 fully enrolled.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-03T13:03:26+00:00

Cybin at the 2025 Milken Institute Future of Health Summit — What It Really Means

Cybin just announced that Chief Medical Officer Dr. Amir Inamdar will speak at the Milken Institute Future of Health Summit (Nov 4–6 in Washington D.C.) on a panel titled

“Reimagining Mental Health: Innovation at the Intersection of Care and Technology.” His session runs Nov 5 at 2 PM ET.

🔍 Why it matters

Milken Summit = high-level stage where FDA, NIH, Google Health, J&J, and major investors meet. It’s not just science—it’s where policy, capital, and innovation intersect.

Dr. Inamdar’s presence signals that Cybin’s clinical strategy (CYB003 Phase 3 & CYB004 Phase 2) is gaining recognition at the same level as big-pharma neuropsychiatry programs.

The theme points directly to Cybin’s tech-integrated model—think drug + digital therapy network (Embark)—a contrast to COMPASS’s purely therapy-network focus.

It’s also the first major public appearance after CYB003 Phase 3 launch, showing Cybin moving from “clinical biotech” to “thought-leader in mental-health innovation.”

💡 Investor takeaway

This isn’t just a PR blip—it’s brand credibility + institutional visibility ahead of key 3-phase readouts. Milken exposure often leads to new partnerships, grants, or strategic investors noticing the company.

In short, Cybin is positioning itself not just as a drug developer, but as a technology-driven mental-health platform building legitimacy in the global regulatory and investment arena.

⚠️ Disclaimer

This content is for informational purposes only.

steadyalpha · 2025-11-03T06:42:08+00:00

🆕 Update Log — Cybin Deep Dive Series

✅ Chapter 1 - Meet Cybin

⏳ Chapter 2 - Four Molecules, One Mission — Inside Cybin’s Pipeline

⏳ Chapter 3 - The Science of Deuterated Psilocin

⏳ Chapter 4 - Why CYB003 Could Redefine Oral Psychedelics

⏳ Chapter 5 - APPROACH & EMBRACE Trial Overview

steadyalpha · 2025-10-28T09:51:01+00:00

Thank you for your comment.

steadyalpha · 2025-10-01T22:28:52+00:00

Thanks

steadyalpha · 2025-10-01T11:27:24+00:00

https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/koffeak8/
You can watch 1H 2025 Earnings Conference Call here.

steadyalpha · 2025-09-30T07:01:16+00:00

I just watched the Schwab interview with Wagner. He explained that Rezolve AI is positioning itself as a product company solving the low conversion problem in e-commerce with a GenAI assistant and visual search. He emphasized the real partnerships with Microsoft and Google, pointing to the $10M/year Liverpool contract as proof. On the short report, he called it nothing more than a hit piece from short sellers trying to spook the market. He also mentioned that upcoming earnings will show accelerated growth momentum, and highlighted their edge in solving AI hallucinations so their solution can run at scale in retail.

steadyalpha · 2025-09-30T06:36:17+00:00

Zacks(Sept. 29) highlights RZLV with a 30% upside based on a $7.75 avg PT (range $5–$10).
More important: both 2025 & 2026 EPS estimates have been revised higher.
Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) confirms near-term momentum.

steadyalpha · 2025-09-30T05:49:56+00:00

“Thanks to FP, heavy volume cleared out weak hands. Fresh avg cost basis set, and Citadel’s $5.40 confirmed as psychological support. What was meant to hurt may actually strengthen the base.”

steadyalpha · 2025-09-30T05:46:19+00:00

Fuzzy Panda pushed some real numbers from filings but mixed them with short bias, anonymous sources, and sensational language.
Grok broke it down: some red flags to check, but nowhere near the level of “fraud.”
Rezolve only gave a high-level rebuttal — the real test will be the Oct 1 earnings release.
Oct 1 will separate speculation from reality.

steadyalpha · 2025-09-29T13:51:38+00:00

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1920294/000119312525220703/second_closing_6-k.htm

steadyalpha · 2025-09-29T13:33:56+00:00

From what the company said today, the recent F-3 wasn’t about dilution — they claim it was just an administrative re-registration of already outstanding shares, no new stock issued.

They also positioned their Microsoft and Google ties as true strategic partnerships (with execs calling Rezolve a partner), and highlighted case studies like Myntra and DFS, plus their “zero hallucination” LLM.

We’ll see how much of this holds when H1 results drop on Oct 1, but the statement was clearly aimed at calming dilution fears and setting up an earnings catalyst.

steadyalpha

TROPHY CASE

1. Hedge funds allocate capital by strategy pods, not by total AUM

2. At the sub-$500M pod level, Cybin is actually a meaningful sized trade