Start here if you're new
what it is
It sells shoulder replacement implants and the tools around them to surgeons and hospitals.
how it gets paid
Last year Shoulder Innovations made $47M in revenue. Advanced implant systems was the main engine at $28.2M, or 60% of sales.
why it's growing
Revenue grew 49.6% last year. The quarter showed a classic split screen. Gross margin stayed strong at 76.4%.
what just happened
Revenue hit $33M, up 180% vs. prior year, but EPS fell to -$7.00.
At a glance
n/a balance sheet
19.6x trailing p/e — priced about right
$12.00 fy2025 eps est
$2B fy2026 rev est
55.6% operating margin
What they do
It sells shoulder replacement implants and the tools around them to surgeons and hospitals.
This company does one thing. Shoulders. That focus helps it build an ecosystem around implants, planning, instruments, and surgeon support instead of selling a generic bag of hardware. You can see the pricing power in a 76.4% gross margin (gross margin → money left after making the product → so what: the products are valued, even if the company still loses money overall).
How they make money
$47M
annual revenue · their business grew +49.6% last year
Advanced implant systems
$28.2M
Preoperative planning
$7.1M
Instrument systems
$7.5M
Specialized support services
$2.8M
Surgeon collaboration and training
$1.4M
The products that matter
shoulder implant platform
InSet Total Shoulder System
$38.0M · about 80% of revenue
this is the business. it generated $38.0M last year and grew 65%. if surgeon adoption keeps moving, SI has room to matter. if adoption cools, there is nowhere for the weakness to hide.
main growth engine
surgical workflow instruments
Humerus-First Instrumentation
$9.3M · about 20% of revenue
this smaller bucket brought in $9.3M and grew 15%. it matters because workflow is part of the sales pitch. the growth gap also tells you implants are still doing almost all of the heavy lifting.
procedure support
economic profile
Gross Margin Profile
76.7% gross margin
gross margin is revenue left after direct product costs. in plain English: the implant itself is not the problem. selling, scaling, and shrinking an -87.4% net margin is the problem.
unit economics vs scale
Key numbers
76.4%
gross margin
Gross margin → money left after making the product → so what: the implants have real pricing power even before overhead wrecks the income statement.
+49.6%
annual growth
Revenue growth → how fast sales are climbing → so what: demand is moving much faster than a typical small medtech.
55.6%
operating margin
Operating margin → profit after running the business → so what: every $1 of sales still loses about $0.56.
5%
debt load
Long-term debt is only 5% of capital, so the balance sheet looks light compared with the income statement damage.
Financial health
n/a
strength
- balance sheet grade n/a
- long-term debt $15M (5% of capital)
n/a — functional but not a standout on the balance sheet.
Total return vs. market
Return history isn't available for SI right now.
source: institutional data · return history unavailable
What just happened
missed estimates
Revenue hit $33M, up 180% vs. prior year, but EPS fell to -$7.00.
The quarter showed a classic split screen. Gross margin stayed strong at 76.4%, while profitability stayed ugly, with a -55.6% operating margin in the broader financial picture.
$33M
revenue
$7.00
eps
76.4%
gross margin
the number that mattered
76.4% gross margin matters most because it says the product works commercially; now management has to prove the business model works too.
source: company earnings report, 2026
Get this snapshot in your inbox
This page, delivered free — plus weekly updates when the numbers change. plain english, no spam.
weekly updates
earnings alerts
plain english
no spam
What could go wrong
the risk is not demand in the abstract. the risk is that SI proves surgeons like the product but never proves the company can turn that into a durable business.
med
Losses stay too close to revenue
SI lost $40.4M on $47.3M of sales last year. When your loss is nearly as large as your revenue, growth alone does not save you unless expenses start rising much slower than sales.
If that ratio does not improve, investors stop treating this as a scaling medtech name and start treating it as a recurring financing story.
med
Guidance miss breaks the premium setup
2026 guidance calls for $62M–$65M in revenue, or 31–37% growth. At 6.1x sales versus a 2.8x industry average, the stock is not priced for a stumble.
A miss would not just trim estimates. It would challenge the whole scale-first argument you are being asked to fund.
med
One product line carries most of the story
The InSet Implant System already represents about 80% of revenue and grew much faster than the rest of the business. That focus helps when adoption is rising. It hurts if adoption slows.
If surgeon uptake softens or a larger rival pushes harder on pricing and sales coverage, SI does not have a second growth engine to offset the damage.
med
Cash runway is still too opaque
Long-term debt looks manageable at $15M, but the snapshot feed does not give a full runway picture. For a company losing $40.4M a year, that missing piece matters.
If cash is tighter than the market assumes, dilution becomes part of the thesis whether you like it or not.
A company losing $40.4M on $47.3M of sales can still work as an investment. But only if revenue keeps compounding fast and the loss ratio falls fast enough that you can see a real business forming.
source: institutional data · regulatory filings · risk analysis
Pay attention to
revenue guide
$62M–$65M is the number that matters
Management guided to 31–37% growth for 2026. If quarterly revenue starts pointing below that range, the premium sales multiple gets harder to defend.
margin trend
76.7% gross margin needs to hold
Gross margin says the implants themselves are attractive. If that number slips while SI is still deeply unprofitable, the path from good product to good business gets longer.
next catalyst
q1 2026 earnings will set the tone
This will be the first report after full-year guidance. You want to see growth stay strong enough that 31–37% still looks achievable after one quarter, not theoretical.
loss conversion
Losses need to shrink as a share of sales
Last year SI lost $40.4M on $47.3M in sales. The headline growth is easy to like. The harder question is whether the loss profile starts looking less extreme quarter by quarter.
Analyst rankings
coverage
thin
institutional ranking data is incomplete for SI. in human-speak, there is not enough street coverage here to outsource your thinking.
what to use instead
results
With a company this early, the scoreboard is simple: revenue growth, gross margin, and whether losses are shrinking as a share of sales.
source: institutional data
Institutional activity
institutional ownership data for SI is being compiled.
source: institutional data
Price targets
3-5 year target range
n/a
n/a
$14
current price
n/a
target midpoint · n/a from current
Want the deeper analysis?
The full deep dive: dcf model, scenario analysis, competitive moat breakdown, and quarterly tracking — everything on this page, taken further.
see plans from $5/moThe deep dive