Equillium, Inc.

Refresh delta (since 2026-06-20)

What changed (material moves)

1. The stock is down ~31% and the sell-side went loud into the decline. $3.05 (Jun 18) → $2.10 (Aug 10, 11:31 EDT), market capMarket capitalisationThe share price multiplied by the number of shares. What the market says the equity is worth. $132.8M on 63.23M shares; 52-week range now $0.756–$3.540. In the middle of that drawdown, Piper Sandler initiated Overweight, PT $20 (Jul 13) and Clear Street initiated Buy, PT $9 with the stock at $2.47 (Jul 20) — while Zacks cut to Strong Sell (Jul 15). Consensus PTConsensus price targetThe average of what published analysts think the share price should be. An opinion poll, not a forecast. ~$8.56. Two very bullish initiations did not hold the tape.

2. Shareholders armed a reverse split and doubled the authorized share count. At the 2026 Annual Meeting (May 28), holders approved (a) a reverse stock split at a board-discretion ratio of 1-for-2 to 1-for-20, effectable any time through Dec 31, 2027, and (b) an increase in authorized common from 200,000,000 to 400,000,000 shares. Proposal 4 drew the heaviest dissent of the meeting: 42.7M for vs 11.6M against. This directly reverses a prior-dossier bull point ("did not do a reverse splitReverse stock splitMerging several shares into one to lift the share price. It changes nothing about what the company is worth, and is usually done to keep a listing or to prepare a larger raise.").

3. RA Capital's entire block was registered for resale. The Form S-3Shelf registration (Form S-3)A filing that pre-clears shares to be sold later, without a fresh approval each time. It does not mean shares have been sold — it means they can be, at short notice. covering 18,878,101 shares (1,179,508 common + 17,698,593 pre-funded-warrant shares) held by RA Capital Healthcare Fund, L.P. was filed Apr 7 and declared effective April 16, 2026. That is ~30% of shares outstanding, freely saleable, in a name that trades thin. The prior dossier recorded the March raise as validation; it did not record the resale overhang that came with it.

4. Insider selling into the pivot rally — including one of the two named key-person dependencies, off-plan. Stephen Connelly, Ph.D., President & Chief Scientific Officer, sold 200,000 shares at $3.1638 on 2026-06-04 plus 30,975 at $2.9401 on 2026-06-05 (~$724k gross, 2017 founders shares), leaving 762,025 — and the Form 4Form 4The filing an insider must make within two business days of buying or selling their own company’s shares. reports aff10b5One = 0, i.e. NOT under a Rule 10b5-1 plan [SEC Form 4Form 4The filing an insider must make within two business days of buying or selling their own company’s shares. acc. 0001746808-26-000004; Form 144 acc. 0001974158-26-000071/73]. Separately Christine Zedelmayer, SVP & COO, exercised-and-sold ~567,677 shares across Feb 19 / Mar 9 / Mar 13 / May 27 / Jun 5 at $1.74–$2.93 on $0.73–$0.785 strikes, under a 10b5-1 plan, holding 62,586 common throughout [SEC Forms 4 acc. 0001797818-26-000003/4/8/9/11]. The 10-QForm 10-QThe quarterly version of the annual report. Lighter, and not audited. names Steel and Connelly as the two people the company is "highly dependent on".

5. New science that reframes the competitive story: the AhR → miR-124 axis. At a May 29, 2026 virtual investor event, CSO Connelly presented preclinical data that AhR activation drives miR-124 induction, that both EQ504 and Abivax's obefazimod (ABX464) induce miR-124, and that an AhR antagonist blocks the effect — with molecular modelling and reporter assays identifying obefazimod itself as a moderately potent AhR agonist (EC50 ≈ 400 nM). If it holds, obefazimod moves from competitor with a different mechanism to clinical validation of EQ504's mechanism. This is the strongest new bull input in the window and it is what Piper's $20 is built on.

6. The Phase 1 hardened in detail and softened in timing. It is a first-in-human SAD/MAD in healthy volunteers in Australia, with CYP1A1 as the primary AhR target-engagement biomarker and IL-22 for mucosal effect; SAD/MAD data in H1 2027. Company language drifted from "mid-2026" to "around mid-year 2026, progressing into the third quarter." As of 2026-08-10 there is no announcement of study initiation or first dosing, and EDGAR shows no company filing of any kind since 2026-06-05 [SEC EDGAR submissions, CIK 0001746466, retrieved 2026-08-10].

7. A real clinical hire, and a board that got smaller. Snehal Naik, Ph.D. was appointed Chief Development Officer on May 13, 2026 — previously SVP & Head of Clinical Development at Ventyx Biosciences. Meanwhile director Peter Colabuono was not renominated and the board shrank 7 → 6. A ~145,000-option inducement grant at a $3.08 strike was reported Jun 2.

8. EQ302's language was downgraded. Q1-2026 language is now "evaluating further advancement of EQ302" — softer than the prior dossier's "toxicology/IND-enabling work ongoing." Treat EQ302 as capital-gated optionality, not a funded second program, until a filing says otherwise.

9. Holder register moved. New: abrdn / Aberdeen Group plc — 3,352,837 shares, 5.3% (13GSchedule 13GA filing by an investor who has crossed 5% of a company but intends to stay passive. The activist version is a 13D. filed 2026-05-07). ADAR1 Capital 9.9% → 9.5% (13G/A, 2026-05-15). Decheng 8.9% aggregate as of 2026-03-31 (13G/A, 2026-05-15). RA Capital 9.9%, hard-capped by the pre-funded-warrant blocker (13GSchedule 13GA filing by an investor who has crossed 5% of a company but intends to stay passive. The activist version is a 13D., 2026-03-20) [SEC Schedules 13G/13G-A, CIK 0001746466].

What held

• The structural thesis is intact. Still one operating segment, $0 revenue, two assets, both preclinical, no approved AhR drug for IBD, and the equity is still a call option struck on the EQ504 proof-of-mechanismProof of mechanismEvidence that a drug does the biological thing it was designed to do — which is a step short of showing that patients get better. readout. Nothing in the window changed that.
• Runway is still not the near-term risk. $61.322M cash at Mar 31 2026, no debt, total liabilities $3.596M. "Into 2029" remains management's claim — with a caveat added in Lens 11 below.
• Sponsorship held. RA Capital, Decheng and ADAR1 are all still on the register at or near their blockers; abrdn is new. Registered-for-resale is not sold.
• No new legal or enforcement findings. SEC LR and AAER searches return zero through 2026-08-10. The EDGAR UPLOAD dated 2026-04-13 is NOT a comment letter — it is the staff's routine "we have not reviewed and will not review your registration statement" notice on the S-3, signed by the Office of Life Sciences [SEC UPLOAD acc. 0000000000-26-003704, read in full]. Recorded here so a future reader does not mistake it for a review.

Competitive advantages / moat

The moat argument changed shape, not size.

• The new claim: EQ504's differentiation is no longer only "gut-restricted, non-immunosuppressive AhR modulator." It is now "the upstream node of the pathway obefazimod already validated in Phase 3" — AhR activation drives miR-124; obefazimod is itself a ~400 nM AhR agonist; an AhR antagonist blocks miR-124 induction. Clear Street's note frames the same idea commercially: EQ504's "pleiotropic biology" can "modulate multiple commercially validated cytokines (TNF-α, IL-23, IL-12)".
• Why this matters: in the prior dossier obefazimod was listed under the competitive set as a "different MoA, miR-124." If the AhR→miR-124 link is real, Abivax's Phase 3 becomes a read-through in EQ504's favour rather than a rival's head start. That is the single largest change in the bull case since June.
• Why it is not yet a moat: this is company-generated preclinical data presented on a company webinar, not peer-reviewed, not independently replicated, and not in humans. A mechanistic kinship argument also cuts the other way — being upstream of a validated node does not establish that a gut-restricted modulator produces the same systemic benefit, and it invites the question of why one would prefer an unproven upstream agent to an agent with Phase 3 data.
• IP unchanged: four AhR patent families; composition-of-matter to 2037 (US/KR), 2039 (HK). Bargaining power still essentially zero pre-data.

Net: the moat thesis got a better story and no more evidence. Provenance grade on the central new claim: company-sourced preclinical, unreplicated.

Segments / spend allocation

Still one operating segment; the 10-Q confirms the CODM is the CEO and monitors only net loss, R&D and G&A.

The signature to watch is R&D re-inflating. At $3.0M/qtr, R&D is at a post-pivot trough that assumes almost no clinical spend. A SAD/MAD in Australia plus a CDO hire plus new headcount should push R&D back up through H2 2026 — and if the Q2 print on ~Aug 13 shows R&D still near $3M, that is evidence the Phase 1 has not started, not evidence of discipline.

Pipeline by phase + latest financials

No new quarter has printed. The Q2-2026 10-Q is not on EDGAR as of 2026-08-10 (last filing of any kind: 2026-06-05) and results are expected ~Aug 13, 2026 [SEC EDGAR submissions, CIK 0001746466, retrieved 2026-08-10; web: stockanalysis.com, 2026-08-03]. So the numbers below are still the Q1-2026 set, now with the balance sheet fully extracted into our figures (see the provenance note at the end).

Q1 2026 books (primary, now in the CSV):

• Q1 operating cash burnCash burnHow much more cash goes out than comes in, per period. The clock on a company with no profits. $(4.301)M; capexCapital expenditureMoney spent on long-lived things — buildings, machines, servers — rather than on running costs. $3k; depreciation $24k; SBC $0.930M; interest income $309k (no interest expense).
• Correction to the prior dossier: it recorded "$0.76M payables" for Q1-2026. That is the Dec-31-2025 figure; Q1-2026 accounts payable was $1.295M. Immaterial to the thesis, corrected for the record.
• The share count to use is not 63.2M. The 17,698,593 pre-funded warrantsPre-funded warrantA right to buy shares that has already been paid for, bar a token penny. It behaves like a share the investor already owns, so leaving it out of a share count understates the company’s real size. are struck at $0.0001 and are economically common; that is why weighted-average diluted shares were 96.3M against 63.2M outstanding. Any market-cap figure built on 63.23M — including the widely quoted $132.8M — understates the real capitalisation by ~28%.
• Guidance: none. our figures remains empty (the company issues no financial guidance).
• Consensus and a conflict to surface: an aggregator carries a Q2-2026 EPS estimate of $(0.26). That is arithmetically hard to reconcile — a $(0.26) quarter on ~96M weighted shares implies a ~$25M quarterly net loss against a $5.3M Q1 actual. It is most likely a full-year estimate carried in a quarterly field, or an estimate built on a stale ~20M share count. Not resolved here — flagged so it is not cited as a beat/miss bar on Aug 13.

Call-sentiment shift

There is no earnings call to read, and that is itself the finding. The FY2025 (2026-03-25) and Q1-2026 (2026-05-13) results 8-Ks furnish a press release under Item 2.02 and reference no conference call or webcast; the Q1 press release contains no call or webcast details either. Equillium did hold calls historically (Q4-2024 results, 7:00am ET, 2025-03-27). transcripts/ remains empty (0 files); no clean transcript for FY2025 or Q1-2026 exists on Fool or Insider Monkey. Management-voice sentiment therefore has to be read from written releases and the one investor event.

Sentiment trajectory across the last four disclosures:

The shift that matters is from stated confidence to a 9-week communications gap across the exact window the catalyst was guided into. Two readings are live and this refresh cannot separate them: (a) routine micro-cap summer quiet and they will announce initiation alongside Q2 results, or (b) the study slipped. The Aug 13 print resolves it. Note also that the most bullish management communication of the window (May 29) was delivered by the officer who sold founders stock off-plan six days later — stated separately from any inference about why.

Catalyst calendar + mechanism comps

Mechanism comps — materially revised. Abivax / obefazimod moves from the competitor column toward the validation column if the AhR→miR-124 link survives replication. Adial/Azora AT177 (colon-targeted AhR agonist) remains the most direct mechanistic rival. The rest of the UC field — anti-TL1A (Roche, Merck), oral S1P, JAKs, IL-23s — is unchanged and still years ahead on evidence.

Valuation comps: n/a. No EV/Sales, EV/EBIT or P/E is meaningful at $0 revenue.

Stock-price catalysts (the tape)

Price path across the window, each point sourced:

Moves >5% and the honest attribution: the decline is a grind, not an event — there is no single >5% gap tied to a disclosed catalyst in the window, because there were no disclosures after Jun 5. What the tape did do is absorb two bullish initiations without lifting: Piper's Overweight/$20 on Jul 13 came with the stock at ~$2.99 and it is $2.10 four weeks later; Clear Street's Buy/$9 landed Jul 21 at $2.47. A stock that falls ~30% through an $8.56 consensus target is telling you the marginal seller is not reading research — the two candidates on the record are the live 18.9M-share RA Capital resale shelf and officer selling, alongside short interestShort interestHow many shares have been borrowed and sold by people betting the price falls. of 4.71M shares / 4.2 days to coverDays to coverHow many normal trading days it would take for everyone betting against the stock to buy back in. A high number means the exit is crowded. as of mid-July. Zacks' Strong Sell cut (Jul 15) is a symptom, not a cause — it is a quant-model rating on a company with no earnings to model.

Management

• Title correction to the prior dossier. The 10-Q states plainly: Bruce D. Steel serves as Chief Executive Officer (signing as Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer), and Stephen Connelly, Ph.D. serves as President and Chief Scientific Officer. The prior dossier described Steel as "Co-Founder, President & CEO; also CFO." Steel is CEO+CFO; Connelly is President+CSO. The CEO=CFO governance flag stands and is confirmed by the primary document.
• New: Snehal Naik, Ph.D., Chief Development Officer (May 13, 2026) — ex-SVP & Head of Clinical Development, Ventyx Biosciences; 15+ years, immunology/inflammation, led global development programs. This is the right hire for the moment: a 14-person company entering first-in-human needs someone who has run clinical operations, and Steel/Connelly are a financier and a bench scientist. Read it as a genuine positive on execution capacity.
• Board contracted 7 → 6; Peter Colabuono not renominated. Note the vote spread on the two Class II directors: Steel drew 45.96M for / 0.14M withheld, while Charles McDermott drew 36.07M for / 10.02M withheld — a ~22% withhold rate against one director is unusually high and worth a question, though it carries no legal consequence in a plurality election.
• Skin in the game deteriorated at the officer level. Connelly's direct holding fell 993,000 → 762,025 (−23%) in two days, sold off-plan into the highest prices the stock has seen since 2023. Zedelmayer's direct common has been 62,586 shares throughout, with everything above that monetised on exercise under a 10b5-1 plan. Neither is illegal, and Zedelmayer's pattern is unremarkable (cheap options, scheduled plan). Connelly's is the one that carries information: a discretionary sale by a named key-person dependency, one week after he personally presented the company's most bullish scientific claim, two months before the catalyst he is responsible for.
• Capital-allocation read unchanged from June — decisive on the pivot, poor on the $216M/8yr itolizumab history. What the window adds is that the same team has now taken standing authority to reverse-split up to 1-for-20 and to double the share count, which is the toolkit for a much larger raise than "into 2029" implies.

Forensic red flags

Dilution arithmetic, stated plainly. 63,226,556 outstanding + 17,698,593 pre-funded warrants = 80,925,149 economic shares today. Authorized capacity is now 400,000,000. The gap between those two numbers is the honest measure of how much dilution the structure permits, and it was quadrupled relative to the outstanding count in a single vote.

Forward path, runway and rNPV

Model status — stated honestly. No pro-forma workbook was built and no model was rebuilt this run. our model is a revenue-driven engine — growth compounds off LTM revenue and every driver is expressed as a % of revenue (opex, capex, ocaPct, oclPct) [verified by reading scripts/research/our model]. With LTM revenue of $0, every projected line resolves to zero and every margin is undefined; the output would be a workbook of zeros carrying false authority. Per the, runway-to-catalyst and rNPV replace the earnings model. our figures was, however, backfilled from the primary filings this run (3 rows: 2025-Q1, 2025-Q4, 2026-Q1) so the next refresh has a real baseline — the prior dossier flagged it empty.

Three-year EPS path. Requested, and computable — but read it as a burn-and-dilution schedule, not an earnings forecast. EPS here is net loss ÷ weighted shares; it does not converge toward profit on any horizon in this window and carries no valuation signal.

Runway — with a correction to the prior dossier's arithmetic. June's read was "$61.322M ÷ ~$17.2M ≈ 3.6 years." That divides by a trough burn: Q1-2026 R&D of $3.0M is post-itolizumab and pre-clinic. Re-running it on the ramp above:

• Jun 30 2026E cash ≈ $56M — the Aug 13 print tests this directly.
• End-2027E ≈ $36M; end-2028E ≈ $5M.

So "into 2029" survives — but only on the assumption that Equillium does not self-fund a Phase 2. The moment a Phase 2 UC efficacy study is committed, this is a 2027–2028 financing story, and the reverse-split authority plus the 400M authorized share count are exactly the instruments that story needs. That is the honest reconciliation of "3.6 years of runway" with "we just quadrupled our issuance headroom."

EV — the number that actually re-rated.

• Economic shares 80,925,149 × $2.10 = ~$170M capitalisation. Note this is ~28% above the $132.8M headline, which uses 63.23M.
• Less ~$56M estimated Jun-30 cash → EV ≈ $114M.
• Against the prior dossier's ~$130–185M EV band at $3.05. The option got roughly 25–35% cheaper while the mechanistic case got stronger. That is the single most decision-relevant sentence in this refresh.

rNPV sketch — unchanged inputs, better entry. $1–2B plausible peak UC sales; ~8–12% preclinical-to-approval PoS for a novel-mechanism GI small molecule. At ~$114M EV the market is paying somewhat less than fair value for a ~1-in-10 shot than it was in June — but "cheaper lottery ticket" is not the same as "de-risked," and the PoS input has not moved because no human has taken the drug.

Brier-style forecasts (recorded for our position log to lift; not logged via our model, per unattended rules):

EQ — EQ504 Phase 1 study confirmed INITIATED (first subject dosed) by 2026-12-31, p ≈ 0.72 — revised down from 0.80 in June. The guided mid-2026 window has passed with no announcement and no filing since Jun 5. EQ — EQ504 SAD/MAD reports a positive CYP1A1 target-engagement signal by 2027-09-30, p ≈ 0.55. Target engagement in healthy volunteers is a substantially lower bar than the mucosal IL-22 readout; do not conflate the two. EQ — board effects a reverse stock split by 2027-12-31, p ≈ 0.40. Authority exists to Dec 2027; at $2.10 there is no Nasdaq compliance need, so this fires mainly as a precursor to an uplisted raise.

Bull vs bear

Bull (updated). The mechanism story got materially better and the price got materially cheaper in the same window. If AhR sits upstream of miR-124, then Abivax's Phase 3 obefazimod programme is doing EQ504's mechanistic validation for it — and EQ504 arrives gut-restricted and non-immunosuppressive, which is precisely the safety axis the UC market pays for. Around that: no debt, $61.3M cash, equity doubled to $59.5M, an actual clinical operator hired to run the study (Naik, ex-Ventyx), RA Capital/Decheng/ADAR1 all still on the register with abrdn newly at 5.3%, and four sell-side houses now positive with a consensus PT of $8.56 against a $2.10 print. EV of ~$114M for a ~10% shot at a $1–2B-peak UC drug, with the first human readout in H1-2027 and cash that reaches it without a forced raise, is a better entry than June offered.

Bear (updated, and it grew a new leg). Everything from June still applies — both assets preclinical, zero human data on EQ504, a team that already burned $216M and eight years on a Phase 3 failure, and a crowded UC field years ahead on evidence. What the window added is structural: (1) shareholders handed the board a 1-for-20 reverse-split authority and 400M authorized shares, which is not the balance sheet of a company that believes it is funded into 2029; (2) 18.9M shares — ~30% of the count — became freely saleable on Apr 16, and the stock has fallen ~30% since regardless of two very bullish initiations; (3) the President & CSO sold founders stock off-plan at the highs, a week after presenting the bull thesis himself; (4) the guided catalyst window opened and closed in silence — no filing of any kind since Jun 5. And the new science is company-generated, unreplicated preclinical data presented on a company webinar. That is a thesis leaning harder on narrative than it was in June, with more paper authorized to sell into it.

Pre-mortem — it is late 2027 and the thesis broke. What happened? The likeliest path is no longer just "the data missed." It is a slow structural bleed that arrives before the data: the Phase 1 slipped from mid-2026 into late 2026, the Aug-2025 second closing (~$20M) never triggered because its milestone and price conditions were not met, the RA Capital block sold into a thin tape through H2-2026, the board effected a reverse split to keep institutional eligibility while raising on the 400M authorization, and by the time H1-2027 SAD/MAD data arrived the share count had doubled — so even a clean CYP1A1 signal re-rated a much larger denominator. The second path is the June path unchanged: ambiguous or negative PoM in H1-2027 and the equity round-trips toward residual cash. The third, smaller: a class-wide AhR safety signal — with the added twist that the miR-124 argument now ties EQ504 to obefazimod's fate, so an Abivax setback would cut both ways where in June it would only have helped.

Are multiples too high? No multiples exist. On an option basis the stock is cheaper than in June — ~$114M EV vs ~$130–185M — for a mechanism story that improved and an execution story that did not. The market has given back roughly a third of the pivot re-rate.

Contrarian read. The thing most likely being mispriced is the gap between the sell-side and the tape. A $20 target and a $9 target published within eight days, on a stock that then falls 30%, is not a disagreement about the drug — it is a disagreement about the share structure. The analysts are modelling the asset; the sellers are trading the shelf. If the resale overhang clears and the Phase 1 dosing is announced, those two things converge upward violently. If the reverse split is effected first, they converge the other way.

Devil's advocate (short-seller)

Where the bull case is thinnest, updated for the window:

• The headline valuation is wrong in the bulls' favour, and it is being quoted anyway. "$133M market cap" ignores 17.7M pre-funded warrants struck at $0.0001. The real number is ~$170M. Every "cheap relative to peers" comparison built on the headline figure — including the framing behind Piper's "significantly undervalued" — is starting ~28% too low.
• A $20 price target on a $2.10 stock is a 9.5x, on a molecule no human has taken. That is not a valuation; it is a probability-weighted dream published without the probability. Clear Street's $9 is the same trade at half the leverage. Note what neither can tell you: whether the study started.
• The company went dark for nine weeks across its own guided catalyst window. No 8-KForm 8-KA filing for something that happened between reports and matters enough to tell shareholders now., no PR, no filing of any kind since Jun 5 [SEC EDGAR, retrieved 2026-08-10]. For a company whose entire equity value is "we will dose humans in mid-2026," the absence of a one-paragraph initiation press release is the loudest data point available.
• Insiders monetised the narrative before the market did. The CSO sold 200,000 founders shares off-plan at $3.16 six days after presenting the miR-124 thesis; the COO has taken her direct common down to 62,586 shares. Management's revealed preference in June was to convert story into cash.
• They armed the dilution machine while telling you they are funded into 2029. 1-for-20 reverse-split authority through Dec 2027 and authorized shares doubled to 400M, with 11.6M shares voted against the authorization. Companies funded into 2029 do not need 400M authorized shares against an 81M economic count. One of those two statements is load-bearing and it is not the runway one.
• The new science cuts both ways and bulls only quote one side. If EQ504's value depends on being upstream of miR-124, EQ504's mechanism is now correlated with obefazimod's clinical fate. Bulls booked the read-through and ignored the correlation. It is also unreplicated company data presented on a company webinar by the officer who sold stock a week later.
• EQ302 was quietly demoted. "Evaluating further advancement" is what a company says when a programme is not funded. The "free option on top" from June should be marked to zero until a filing says otherwise.
• Assumptions that must all hold for $2.10 to be cheap: (a) the Phase 1 actually started or starts imminently; (b) CYP1A1 engagement is clean in H1-2027; (c) engagement translates to mucosal effect in patients; (d) Phase 2 gets funded without the reverse split and the 400M authorization being used in anger; (e) RA Capital's 18.9M shares do not come out into a thin book. Miss (a) or (e) and the data never gets its fair hearing. Miss (b) and fair value is residual cash — ~$56M against ~81M economic shares is roughly $0.69/share.
• This is still binary, not a de-rate. A failed or ambiguous PoM does not trim 25%; it takes the equity toward cash.

Lenses carried by reference

• Company overview: unchanged, see the previous dossier, with two amendments: (i) officer titles corrected in Lens 9 above (Steel = CEO/PFO; Connelly = President & CSO); (ii) EQ302's status downgraded to "evaluating further advancement." One operating segment, $0 revenue, ~14-person headcount, La Jolla, Nasdaq Capital Market — all still current.
• Supply chain / CDMO: unchanged, see the previous dossier. No new CDMO, CRO or formulation disclosure in the window. The one refinement is that the Phase 1 is now confirmed ex-US (Australia), which the prior dossier flagged as a possibility.
• Management questions: unchanged, see the previous dossier (15 questions). Five to add for the Aug 13 print: (1) Has the EQ504 Phase 1 dosed its first subject — and if not, what is the specific gating item? (2) Under what conditions would the board effect the reverse split, and why was 1-for-20 sought rather than a narrower range? (3) Why increase authorized shares to 400M if cash funds operations into 2029? (4) Did the Aug-2025 second closing (~$20M) trigger, and if not, which condition failed? (5) Is EQ302 funded in the FY2026 budget, or is "evaluating further advancement" a deferral?