Viatris (VTRS) Q1 FY26 earnings call: guidance and Q&A

Given the strong 18% growth in Greater China, why was full-year guidance only reaffirmed, and what is the durability of this strength?

Management noted it's early in the year but expressed confidence in the China market, attributing growth to strong execution, commercial investments (especially e-commerce), and favorable market fundamentals. They raised the FY26 China growth expectation to mid- to high-single digits but cited dynamic and unpredictable policy risks as a reason for not raising overall guidance yet.

“Yes, it was a clean quarter, driven a lot by revenue in China and North America. You asked about China. I've been involved with business in China since the late '90s. I actually ran China operations for a prior company, and so I'm close to that market. It's the strongest China market over the last 12, 18 months that I've ever seen, both on the innovative side and on the total side.”

asked by Glen Santangelo · answered by Scott Smith

What are the biggest pipeline opportunities over the next 12 months, specifically meloxicam, XULANE LO, cenerimod, and selatogrel?

Philippe Martin highlighted fast-acting meloxicam and XULANE LO as key U.S. launches for this year, supported by strong clinical data and progressing regulatory reviews. He also mentioned pitolisant and Nefecon data in Japan. For longer-term, selatogrel and cenerimod are on schedule, with cenerimod results expected late this year/early next, followed by selatogrel.

“As you point out, importantly, in the U.S., we have meloxicam and [ XULANE LO ] this year. I think these are 2 key important launch for us, supported by very strong clinical data. The review process for these 2 assets with the agency, with the FDA is going as planned.”

asked by Glen Santangelo · answered by Philippe Martin

Can you expand on the selatogrel trial's primary endpoint, specifically how the ordinal scale works for different events like STEMI vs. death, and if sample size re-estimation might be needed?

Philippe Martin explained that selatogrel's primary endpoint is a ranking endpoint designed with the FDA, where the worst outcome for the patient (e.g., death over STEMI) is used. The study is powered for a 20% relative risk reduction, aiming to show a reduction in severity of acute MI events in the selatogrel arm versus placebo. Adjudication is done by a blinded committee.

“It is an endpoint that we designed in collaboration with the FDA and with our KOL. So we -- it's a ranking endpoint where we have -- where we're ranking the severity of the MI and it can go from a scale of death all the way to an acute MI without a significant impact.”

asked by Umer Raffat · answered by Philippe Martin

Is priority review still possible for fast-acting meloxicam, and what can be shared about its expected label, particularly opioid-sparing language? Also, what is the progress on cost savings and their impact on EBITDA margins in '27 and '28?

Philippe Martin expects FDA to provide the PDUFA date for meloxicam soon and anticipates opioid-sparing language in the label based on strong data. Corinne Le Goff added that the product's overall clinical profile, not just opioid-sparing language, drives its commercial opportunity. Paul Campbell confirmed the company is on track to deliver $120 million in cost savings this year, with operating leverage expected to continue into '27 and '28, contributing to margin expansion.

“So we anticipate that the agency -- we're expecting that the agency will be giving us the PDUFA date and timing of review within the next couple of weeks. So we should get much more visibility on that timing, and we will let you know. In terms of the label, there is clearly based on the data our expectation is that the opioid-sparing language will be included as part of the label.”

asked by Matthew Dellatorre · answered by Philippe Martin

What are the implications of the CFO transition for capital allocation/disclosure? Has the bar for BD changed given strong performance and available cash? And can you provide more detail on the $71 million new product contribution?

Scott Smith stated no changes to capital allocation or financial policy with the CFO transition, expressing confidence in Interim CFO Paul Campbell. He reiterated BD priorities remain focused on in-market, accretive assets, balancing investments with shareholder returns. Paul Campbell clarified the $71 million new product revenue is a recurring figure, in line with expectations, and channel inventories are normal.

“So first of all, on the CFO question, we should expect no changes to capital allocation or financial policy with no expectations at all. And since it's been brought up, the first thing besides the fact there will be no changes, I'd like to thank Doretta for being a great partner to me.”

asked by Leszek Sulewski · answered by Scott Smith

How does Viatris plan to leverage its diverse therapeutic verticals in the U.S. innovative business, and what is its appetite for taking on additional R&D risk via in-licensing early-stage assets?

Scott Smith explained that Viatris will focus on specialty-driven approaches with small, therapeutically focused sales forces (e.g., 150-200 reps for meloxicam, ~70 for women's health). The goal is to build cornerstone products in therapeutic areas and then expand. For R&D risk, the immediate focus is on in-market, accretive assets, with early clinical pipeline additions being a longer-term possibility (5+ years).

“Even though there may be a couple of different, as you said, a high-class problem, of Phase III programs being successful and also launching in the U.S., we're going to have a specialty focus. These are not huge from a spend perspective. We're not going into primary care. We're not going to have thousands of sales reps out there.”

asked by David Amsellem · answered by Scott Smith

What are the learnings from generic semaglutide entering some markets, and what is Viatris's GLP-1 strategy? Also, what is the go-forward impact of ARV supply constraints?

Philippe Martin stated Viatris intends to be a significant GLP-1 player, developing generic versions with a focus on the U.S. market, leveraging device expertise for auto-injectors. Paul Campbell noted that ARV supply constraints are being mitigated by moving production, and all associated risks are factored into the reaffirmed full-year guidance, with potential for upside.

“So we are -- we intend to be a significant player in the GLP-1 space. We are developing every GLP-1s that are currently approved. This is, as you know, a market that is very dynamic. And so we got to be ready for whatever changes may be coming and leverage that.”

asked by Ethan Brown · answered by Philippe Martin