Almada and BioProtect: How Much of the Deal Could Really Reach Cash
The BioProtect MOU points to expected immediate proceeds of $10 million to $12 million for Almada, but the filings also show why that headline is not the same thing as usable cash. The gap runs through diligence, approvals, tax, SAFE mechanics, and a separate capital-reduction bottleneck.
The main article argued that Almada's reported value matters only once it makes the trip from fair value to cash. This continuation isolates the BioProtect thread, because this is where the gap between a transaction headline and liquidity that can actually be used is at its sharpest.
The filings offer an attractive headline: if the memorandum of understanding becomes a binding agreement, the partnership expects immediate proceeds of about $10 million to $12 million from selling all of its BioProtect holdings. But those same filings also contain three filters that prevent that number from being read as free cash: the deal is still non-binding; profit for tax purposes is only about $8 million, excluding initiation fees; and, in parallel, the board approved a capital reduction of only up to $2 million, subject to court approval. In other words, there is a clear difference here between potential value, potential proceeds, and actual distributable cash.
That distinction matters because at the end of 2025 the partnership was still carrying its total BioProtect investment at a fair value of $6.58 million, based on a 22% discount rate and an expected liquidity event in 2 to 4 years. The January 2026 MOU opens a faster monetization path, but it does not replace the certainty hurdles that still sit in the way.
The Headline Is Not the Cash
The first gap is the one between carrying value and possible proceeds. In note 6, the partnership says its total BioProtect investment was valued at $6.58 million as of December 31, 2025, after a fair-value gain of about $1.951 million recorded during the year. That valuation relied on a PWERM model, a 22% discount rate, and an expected liquidity event 2 to 4 years out. That matters because it shows that, at year-end, Almada was still valuing BioProtect through a time-and-uncertainty filter.
Against that stands a different headline: if a binding agreement is signed under the MOU terms, the partnership expects immediate proceeds of $10 million to $12 million from selling all of its BioProtect holdings. So the difference between $6.58 million and $10 million to $12 million is not an inconsistency in the filings. It is the price of moving from a probability-weighted model with a multi-year horizon to a possible cash transaction. That is also why investors cannot just take the year-end fair value, add a modest premium, and assume they have the net cash picture.
The way Almada described the same event reinforces that point. The immediate report said a binding agreement signed before publication of the 2025 statements could have led to another roughly $4 million to $6 million fair-value uplift. Note 6 in the annual statements uses more cautious wording and says only that such a signing could affect fair value. Even close to publication, management still was not presenting the deal as an accounting fact.
What matters most is that the filing does not present the $10 million to $12 million figure as a closed agreement. It presents it as a conditional scenario. Anyone reading that range as a cash fact, rather than as forward-looking guidance, is moving ahead of the event itself.
Tax, SAFE Mechanics, and What “Reaches Cash” Really Means
The second number to hold in mind is the roughly $8 million of profit for tax purposes, excluding initiation fees if any. That is not a technical footnote. It means that, already at the partnership level, the deal is not equivalent to $10 million to $12 million of net economic gain. Part of the headline is already absorbed by cost basis, and another part may be absorbed by tax and fees. The filings do not disclose an actual cash-tax calculation, so there is no basis here for a reliable net-proceeds figure. But they do make one thing clear: the headline is not the amount that would remain fully free for use.
There is also another layer of complexity. In 2025, Almada committed to a SAFE investment of up to $700,000 in BioProtect, in two $350,000 tranches, and funded both tranches in July and October 2025. In a sale, change of control, or IPO event, that SAFE gives the investor, at its election, either repayment of the investment amount or conversion under a predefined mechanism, all subject to BioProtect's priority waterfall. That means the economics are not captured only by the 4.34% fully diluted figure that the partnership attributes to its D-1 and E preferred shares. There is also a separate rights layer that is activated precisely in the sale event on which the current thesis rests.
That is a material point because it explains why the filings avoid a simple “ownership percentage times deal value” formula. Even at the partnership layer, this is a mix of preferred equity and SAFE exposure, so the path from the headline to actual proceeds runs through conversion mechanics, elections, and priority rules. The filing does not quantify the exact impact of that mechanism on the net outcome, so this is another reason to stop short of treating the full $10 million to $12 million as free cash.
| Layer | What is disclosed with certainty | What remains open |
|---|---|---|
| Carrying value | Total BioProtect investment fair value was $6.58 million at year-end 2025 | That value still assumes a 22% discount rate and a 2 to 4 year path to liquidity, not a closed deal |
| Deal headline | Expected immediate proceeds to the partnership are $10 million to $12 million if a binding agreement is signed | The MOU is non-binding, and the range can still move during diligence and closing negotiations |
| Tax layer | Profit for tax purposes is estimated at about $8 million, excluding initiation fees | The filings do not disclose actual cash tax or the fee impact on net proceeds |
| Ownership structure | There is also a $700,000 SAFE with its own sale-event rights | The filings do not provide a quantified bridge from the SAFE mechanics to final proceeds |
| Cash reaching unitholders | The board approved a capital reduction of up to $2 million | Distribution remains subject to court approval and does not pre-authorize the full potential sale proceeds |
Time Is Part of the Price, Not Just Legal Noise
The third reason the headline is not the same as cash is timing. The MOU was signed on January 26, 2026, but it was explicitly described as non-binding. Any binding agreement remains subject to investor due diligence, and BioProtect committed to an exclusivity period of no more than 90 days from the opening of the data room. On top of that come regulatory approvals, third-party consents where required, and approval from the Israel Innovation Authority.
That means the risk here is not only whether the deal happens. It is also when, if ever, it becomes real. A period of up to 90 days sounds short, but it starts only from the opening of the data room, and the filings do not disclose when that opening occurred. So the documents do not support a target date for signing, let alone closing. From a liquidity perspective that is central: any delay keeps Almada in an in-between state where the value may have improved on paper, but the cash has not yet arrived.
This is exactly where the difference between monetization and usable proceeds becomes visible. Note 6 shows that, at year-end 2025, the valuation still assumed a liquidity event 2 to 4 years away. The January 2026 MOU may shorten that distance, but it does not erase the uncertainty premium. Until there is a binding agreement, completed diligence, and a clear approvals path, the market is looking at a route map, not at cash.
Even After a Closing, Distribution Is Not Automatic
The final bottleneck sits at Almada's own level. Section 8.5 of the annual report says that on March 22, 2026 the partnership board approved a distribution that does not satisfy the profit test, in an amount of up to $2 million, subject to court approval. That looks like a small detail if BioProtect is viewed only as a portfolio company issue. At the partnership level, it is a large one.
The implication is that even if the BioProtect transaction is signed and closes, the only documented distribution path to unitholders currently described in the filings is capped at up to $2 million. It is not an automatic pass-through of all sale proceeds. Further decisions may follow, but they are not in the evidence set here. So “how much of the deal can really reach cash” and “how much of that cash can really reach unitholders” are two different questions.
That also says something important about Almada's capital-allocation reality. Management likely is already thinking about monetization and distribution, otherwise it would not have advanced a capital reduction alongside the annual report. But that same move also shows that the path from accounting value, or even sale proceeds, to cash that is genuinely accessible at the unitholder level still runs through a separate legal wrapper. That is not side bureaucracy. It is a capital bottleneck.
Conclusion
BioProtect is not just another fair-value mark inside Almada. It is the partnership's conversion test from paper value to real liquidity. The MOU opens a monetization path that looks materially better than the end-2025 carrying value, but it still does not produce a number that can honestly be called free cash.
The key line is simple: $10 million to $12 million is a possible deal headline, not a cash floor. Between the two sit a non-binding agreement, diligence, approvals, a tax layer that has not been translated into cash-tax terms, SAFE mechanics that activate precisely in a sale event, and then a separate distribution path that is currently capped at up to $2 million and still subject to court approval.
If a binding agreement lands inside the current headline range, BioProtect could turn 2025 from a fair-value story into a cash story. If not, Almada will still own an asset worth more on paper, but one that still requires the market to believe in the route to monetization.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.