2 Stocks That Could Realistically Double by 2030

Abivax’s obefazimod cleared a phase 3 ulcerative colitis trial, with another phase 3 maintenance readout expected before the second quarter ends and potential approval by end-2027. Viking Therapeutics expects phase 3 data for VK2735 within 12 to 18 months and plans to start oral VK2735 phase 3 studies by year-end, supporting a positive long-term growth narrative. The article is bullish on both stocks but emphasizes high clinical and regulatory risk.

Analysis

ABVX and VKTX are both “binary-upside” names, but the market is already paying for success. That means the trade is less about whether the science is good and more about whether upcoming readouts are merely good enough to preserve premium multiples versus sufficiently differentiated to re-rate the stocks again. In both cases, the near-term catalyst path is cleaner than the long-term commercialization path, so the highest-volatility window is the next 12 months, not the next 4 years.

For ABVX, the second-order issue is not just clinical efficacy but franchise breadth: a single high-priced asset in an immunology market with strong incumbents leaves little room for execution error. If maintenance data are strong, the stock can squeeze higher on duration extension, but the more important follow-through would be evidence that the label can capture patients who failed prior therapies without major safety drag. If that doesn’t happen, the valuation can de-rate quickly because there is no cash-flow cushion.

VKTX has a better strategic setup because the oral and injectable paths create multiple shots on goal and widen the addressable market, but the obesity space is moving from scarcity to congestion. The market will increasingly discriminate between “another GLP-1” and a product that wins on tolerability, adherence, and convenience; that favors names with differentiated formulations, but it also raises the bar for commercial penetration. A disappointment in phase 3 would likely hit VKTX harder than larger obesity peers because it lacks the manufacturing scale and portfolio diversification to absorb a miss.

The contrarian takeaway is that the bull case is probably underwritten by clinical optionality more than by realistic long-term earnings power. For both names, the better setup is to trade the catalyst window with defined downside rather than own them outright into multiple years of development risk. The market is likely overestimating how quickly either story can convert from promising data into durable cash generation.

Key Decisions for Investors

• ABVX: favor a catalyst-trade long only into the maintenance readout, then reduce or hedge immediately after the print; upside is a short squeeze if data hold, but downside is severe if maintenance weakens the thesis.
• VKTX: initiate a small long ahead of the 12-18 month phase 3 window only if willing to stomach >20% drawdowns; best risk/reward is on positive differentiation vs GLP-1 incumbents, not on broad obesity sector beta.
• Pair trade: long VKTX / short a basket of more mature obesity winners on any strength, betting that VKTX’s multiple expands if oral + injectable optionality reads as differentiated while crowded names face multiple compression.
• Options: use call spreads rather than outright stock in both names to define risk; for ABVX, shorter-dated spreads into the next maintenance catalyst, for VKTX longer-dated spreads across the phase 3 readout window.
• If either stock rallies >25% ahead of the catalyst, take partial profits; these are classic premium-to-news names where the best entry is usually on post-event weakness, not anticipation.