Earnings call transcript: Galapagos Q3 2025 sees earnings miss, stock steady

Galapagos NV ADR (GLPG) reported its Q3 2025 earnings, revealing a larger-than-expected loss with an EPS of -0.4778, missing the forecast of -0.3529 by 35.39%. Revenue also fell short at 76.1 million USD against an expected 79.97 million USD, a 4.84% surprise. Despite these results, the stock showed resilience, with a slight premarket increase of 0.5% to 30.04 USD, following a previous close of 29.89 USD.

Key Takeaways

• EPS and revenue both missed forecasts, with significant surprises of 35.39% and -4.84% respectively.
• Stock price increased slightly by 0.5% in premarket trading, indicating mixed investor sentiment.
• Strategic reorganization and cell therapy business wind-down are underway, impacting financials.
• Strong cash position of 3.05 billion EUR as of September 30, 2025.

Company Performance

Galapagos reported an operating loss of 462.2 million EUR for the first nine months of 2025, reflecting challenges in its cell therapy business, which faced a 204.8 million EUR impairment. The company is undergoing a strategic reorganization, incurring costs of 135.5 million EUR. Despite these setbacks, Galapagos maintains a robust cash position, supporting its ongoing focus on oncology, immunology, and inflammatory diseases.

Financial Highlights

• Revenue: 76.1 million USD, below the forecast of 79.97 million USD.
• Earnings per share: -0.4778 USD, missing the forecast of -0.3529 USD.
• Cash and investments: 3.05 billion EUR as of September 30, 2025.

Earnings vs. Forecast

Galapagos missed both EPS and revenue forecasts for Q3 2025, with the EPS surprise at 35.39% and revenue surprise at -4.84%. This performance marks a significant deviation from expectations, highlighting ongoing financial challenges and strategic restructuring impacts.

Market Reaction

Despite the earnings miss, Galapagos’ stock price increased by 0.5% in premarket trading to 30.04 USD. The stock remains within its 52-week range of 22.36 to 37.78 USD, showing relative stability amidst broader biotech sector volatility.

Outlook & Guidance

Looking forward, Galapagos anticipates being cash flow neutral to positive by the end of 2026. The company is actively pursuing strategic partnerships, particularly with Gilead, to enhance its therapeutic pipeline and create value through potential transactions.

Executive Commentary

CEO Henry Gosebruch emphasized, "We are committed to building a novel therapeutic pipeline that can have a meaningful impact for patients." He also highlighted the company’s financial discipline and focus on value creation, stating, "Our cash balance of approximately 3 billion EUR represents approximately 46 EUR per share."

Risks and Challenges

• The ongoing strategic reorganization and cell therapy wind-down could lead to operational disruptions.
• The biotech capital environment remains challenging, affecting funding and investment opportunities.
• Potential employee impact with up to 365 positions affected by the business wind-down.
• Market volatility and competitive pressures in the biotech sector.

Q&A

During the earnings call, analysts inquired about the company’s openness to proposals during the cell therapy wind-down process. Management confirmed their willingness to consider proposals and emphasized their commitment to financial discipline in potential deals. Additionally, the collaborative relationship with Gilead was discussed as a key strategic focus moving forward.

Full transcript - Galapagos NV ADR (GLPG) Q3 2025:

Sandra, Conference Call Operator: Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Galapagos third quarter 2025 financial results conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker’s presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star one and one again. Please be advised that today’s conference is being recorded. I’d now like to hand the conference over to your host today, Dr. Glenn Schulman, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Dr. Glenn Schulman, Head of Investor Relations, Galapagos: Thank you, Sandra, and thank you all for joining us today as we report Galapagos’ nine-month 2025 financial results. Last evening, we issued a press release outlining these results. This release, along with today’s webcast presentation, can be found on the Galapagos Investor website. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that we will be making forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include remarks concerning future developments of our company and our pipeline, and possible changes in the industry and competitive environment. These forward-looking statements reflect our current views about our plans, intentions, expectations, strategies, and prospects, which are based on the information currently available to us and on assumptions we have made. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these statements and are accurate only as of the date of this recording, November 6, 2025.

Galapagos is not under any obligation to update statements regarding the future or to conform to these statements in relation to actual results unless required by law. You are cautioned not to place any undue reliance on these statements. Joining us on today’s call from the executive team are Henry Gosebruch, Chief Executive Officer, Aaron Cox, Chief Financial Officer, Susan Kwan, Chief Business Officer, and Dan Grossman, Chief Strategy Officer of the company, all of whom will be available during the Q&A session. With all of that, let me now turn the call over to Henry Gosebruch, CEO of Galapagos.

Henry Gosebruch, Chief Executive Officer, Galapagos: Thank you, Glenn, and thank you all for joining us today. It has been a very active time here at Galapagos as we have worked tirelessly toward advancing the transformation of our company. This transformation has been ongoing for several years, and I firmly believe we have a bright future ahead of us. Early this year, we announced our decision to separate the company into two entities, with Galapagos advancing its self-therapy programs and the planned launch of a spin-co that would focus on business development and be funded with approximately EUR 2.45 billion in existing cash. However, in May, it became apparent that the spin-off could not be executed as planned, and the board took swift and decisive action toward a different path to realize value, and I was honored to be named CEO.

The board gave me a clear mandate to analyze strategic alternatives for our existing businesses, including self-therapy. In addition, I was asked to further refine the strategy for deploying our cash resources into transformative business development and rebuilding our pipeline. We moved quickly, brought on advisors, and commenced a thorough strategic review and sale process to identify potential buyers or investors with the expertise and resources to take the self-therapy business forward. We were highly motivated to identify a buyer or investor who could not only support the ongoing investment requirements in the business but also honor the efforts of our employees who have put their blood, sweat, and tears into the self-therapy business over the past several years. However, after a five-month process, there were no viable proposals presented that would reasonably support the business going forward.

We offered to divest the business for minimal upfront consideration, and where appropriate, we even offered to provide capital support to potential buyers, but no party was able to provide committed financing to enable a viable acquisition of the business. One key reason is that several hundreds of millions of EUR would be required for any such deal, given the significant ongoing investment requirements not only in the business but also to stand behind the obligations to our employees. After this comprehensive review of strategic alternatives and given these ongoing investment requirements coupled with evolving market dynamics and taking into account the interests of all relevant stakeholders, the board unanimously agreed to form an intention to wind down the self-therapy business. Given the impact on our employees and ongoing operations, this was a difficult decision. I firmly believe it was the right decision given our circumstances.

Now that the strategic review process has concluded, we are actively consulting with the works councils in Belgium and the Netherlands to seek their advice in order to implement this wind down. During this ongoing consultation process regarding the intended wind down, we would consider any viable proposals to require all or a part of the self-therapy activities if such a proposal emerges during the wind down process. In parallel to all this activity, we have assembled what I believe to be a world-class team focused on executing our business development strategy. Our deal funnel has been building steadily, and I’m confident that we can identify and execute on opportunities that can bring exciting new opportunities to Galapagos and our pipeline. I will share more detail on our strategy in today’s presentation.

As part of our ongoing transformation, we have also welcomed four new board members over the past six months. I am delighted to be working with Jane, Dawn, Neil, and Devong on the board going forward, and I would like to again thank Peter, Simon, Elizabeth, Suzanne, and Andy for all their valuable contributions during their time on our board. As I mentioned, our intention to wind down the self-therapy business is subject to the conclusion of consultations with work councils in Belgium and the Netherlands, which is standard practice in Europe. During this period, Galapagos will continue to operate the business. If the wind down is ultimately implemented, we anticipate that up to approximately 365 employees would be impacted across our offices in Europe, the U.S., and China. Also, we would plan to close Galapagos sites in Leiden, Basel, Princeton, Pittsburgh, and Shanghai.

In this scenario, we would effectively proceed with a full exit of our self-therapy activities, and we would expect to incur the costs detailed on the slide, which will be discussed in more detail during Aaron’s review of financials later on this call. We are deeply grateful to our dedicated employees, investigators, patients, shareholders, and partners for their continued commitment and support. We will stand behind our obligations as an employer to treat our employees fairly throughout all of this. The remaining Galapagos organization will be repositioned for long-term growth through transformational business development and would maintain a dedicated presence at our headquarters in Mechelen, Belgium. We hope to complete the works council process quickly as we aim to provide more clarity to our employees and stakeholders as soon as possible.

Although it is difficult to predict the exact duration of this process, we currently expect it to be concluded in the first quarter of 2026. I wanted to spend a few minutes on the last remaining legacy R&D program, our TIC2 program. Our development team has done an excellent job progressing the phase three enabling studies, and we expect to see data from two studies by early 2026, ahead of our original expectations. The studies are now fully enrolled, and the remaining spend related to this program is moderating. GLPG3667 is a differentiated oral TIC2 inhibitor currently in two phase three enabling studies for SLE and dermatomyositis. At the recent ACR Convergence, we presented new in vitro pharmacological data suggesting additional differentiation of 3667 from two other TIC2 inhibitors. 3667 demonstrated inhibition of the interferon alpha and IL23 pathways with no measurable impact on TIC2 independent pathways.

Additionally, 3667 showed no inhibition of IL10. These findings support our belief in the program’s potential, and we are looking forward to reporting data from the two fully enrolled trials in early 2026, which will guide us toward the next steps to maximize value for this program. Now let’s review the other assets we have at Galapagos. Our significant scientific successes over our 25-plus year history have enabled Galapagos to attract significant capital, and today we have the benefit of a significant cash balance as well as a portfolio of other attractive assets that can drive additional shareholder value. Our cash balance of approximately EUR 3 billion represents approximately EUR 46 per share. This cash balance generates significant interest income. Through the first nine months of this year alone, we received approximately EUR 77 million.

In addition, we are receiving an attractive stream of royalties and earnouts from Gilead and Alfasigma on their sales of Jyseleca, the JAK program developed here at Galapagos. The income related to Jyseleca has been approximately EUR 15 million-EUR 20 million annually and is expected to continue into the mid-2030s with potential upside. In addition, we expect to receive tax receivables of approximately EUR 20 million-EUR 35 million per year over the next three years, with additional opportunities for credits beyond that. We also have stakes in multiple private biotech companies such as ThirdArc, Frontier Medicines, and Onco3R, plus other private companies that haven’t been disclosed. Last but certainly not least, we own our building in Leiden. It’s a fabulous building, easily the nicest lab and office building I’ve ever worked in, a state-of-the-art building in which we invested over EUR 70 million for construction and build-out.

It opened in 2022, and it’s a great asset. As you look at this portfolio in total, I believe we could see the potential for several hundreds of millions of additional value on top of our cash balance from this portfolio. Let’s go back to the ongoing transformation of the company. I am incredibly pleased that we have been able to attract new leadership talent to the company that, in my opinion, represents the team with the best business development expertise in our industry. This team has been through hundreds of M&A and business development transactions as principals and advisors. I won’t go into their individual and very impressive bios, but they are summarized on the slide.

Aside from their bios, having worked closely with each of them, they are not only uniquely talented, but they are wonderful leaders with strong values, and all are excited to be part of our transformation and drive significant value for patients and shareholders going forward. I am very proud to work with this talented group every day as we execute our mission and vision. In addition to our executive talent, we have also assembled a fantastic group of outside advisors that have joined our strategic advisory board. These four individuals have brought numerous drugs to patients, and we are collaborating closely with them as we prioritize the many potential BD transactions in front of us and diligence individual opportunities. Let’s jump into our business development strategy. Let me start with what Galapagos brings to the table as we pursue business development.

We see several key strengths that provide us a unique advantage. First, we’ve built a team to execute creative BD deals. Second, we have significant capital to invest in promising programs and signs. Third, we can be incredibly flexible in our approach as we are not constrained by an existing pipeline. For example, we can enable external teams or companies to pursue their programs with our capital. Finally, we have a unique partnership with Gilead that I believe also represents a unique asset for us that I will discuss some more in a minute. We will be financially disciplined and focused on value creation while pursuing programs we believe can make a clear difference for patients. We’ve identified some key focus areas for our activities. First off, we will focus on what we believe have been meaningfully clinically de-risked and differentiated opportunities.

We are looking for opportunities that can substantially enhance the standard of care in a disease and have clear patient impact. We will initially prioritize areas where there is a strategic synergy with Gilead. Next slide, please. Now let me turn to our existing partnership with Gilead. We’ve been getting a lot of questions on why we believe it’s in our best interest to work with Gilead on business development opportunities, so we wanted to address that here. Let’s start with the obvious. Gilead owns 25% of Galapagos and has an existing collaboration agreement, the OLCA, as we call it, that allows Gilead to opt into U.S. rights of proof-of-concept assets at Galapagos at relatively favorable terms. These terms were originally envisioned for programs that came out of our original discovery platform, but they also apply to business development opportunities we would bring into the company at this stage.

For most assets we might consider bringing in, Gilead’s option to acquire US rights for $150 million upfront would likely represent too much value leakage to make a deal attractive for us. However, Gilead has expressed a willingness to renegotiate these terms, and we share a joint perspective that by working together, we can create win-win deal opportunities that create more value than each of us could drive individually. What does that look like? Gilead has expressed a willingness to contribute capital to our BD activities, and they are also bringing their capabilities to the table, such as their technical due diligence team. By working with them, we might be able to find unique value creation opportunities where, on a combined basis, we might be able to unlock more value in a portfolio than a single party would be able to.

Finally, Gilead’s commercial expertise will bring additional credibility to our efforts. Our partnership also allows for creative deals that could drive structural and financial benefits that Gilead may not be able to achieve on their own. I’ve known some of the key leaders at Gilead for many years, and I’m quite pleased with the close collaborative working relationship we have strengthened over the past several months. In conclusion, I’m confident we can find win-win opportunities that will create value for Galapagos shareholders and Gilead. Let’s explore how working with Gilead may open opportunities that would otherwise not be available to us. There are many deal structures possible. However, we thought it would be helpful to share just three illustrative examples. Starting on the left side, we can partner with Gilead to jointly acquire or license an opportunity. For example, these deals could potentially involve us acquiring public stock.

In the middle, there could be opportunities where we at Galapagos may see value in one asset and Gilead may see value in another asset at the same company, thus enhancing our ability to structure a value-creating deal for a multi-asset company. Finally, on the right, our cash balance makes us a very attractive merger partner, recognizing we would, of course, require receiving fair value for our portfolio of assets in any business combination. How do we operationalize our strategy? We will be flexible on ideas, but financial discipline will be key, and we will balance intrinsic risk of each opportunity with overall portfolio risk. Said in another way, if we dedicate a large portion of our capital to one opportunity, we must have very high confidence in that opportunity to create value.

For any significant transaction, we believe we can renegotiate our existing agreement with Gilead to enable win-win deals for both. Of course, nothing prevents us from doing transactions on our own to the extent that they could drive value over the long term. However, I hope I’ve been clear why we believe working with Gilead can broaden our set of opportunities and create shareholder value. As we execute on our strategy, we believe we can work to eliminate our current trading discount and open our deal aperture even more. Now let me address a few other important topics. As I mentioned earlier during this call, the transformation of Galapagos is well underway. Looking ahead, and if the intention to wind down is ultimately implemented, Galapagos would be a much leaner and strategically focused organization.

We will maintain our headquarters in Belgium, leveraging the experienced and talented teams in place there across a number of functions. Many investors have asked us whether we will return capital to shareholders. While our goal is ultimately to drive value for our shareholders, it’s important to recognize that any return of capital would require alignment with Gilead given their 25% ownership and the terms of our existing partnership agreement with them. In addition, even if permitted, Belgian law imposes certain limitations on capital returns to shareholders. Given we do not have any distributable profits available at the current time, the ability to distribute would require a resolution at an EGM with at least 50% of shares present at the meeting and at least 75% approval.

Again, while this could be an interesting alternative down the road, for now, we are focused on using our capital for business development opportunities. With that overview, I would now like to turn the call over to Aaron Cox, our CFO, to review our nine-month financial results. Aaron. Thanks, Henry. Hello, everyone. In the press release issued last night, we detailed our nine-month financial results through the quarter ended September 30. Total operating loss from continuing operations for the first nine months of 2025 amounted to EUR 462.2 million, compared to an operating loss of EUR 125.6 million for the first nine months of 2024. This operating loss was negatively impacted by an impairment on the cell therapy business of EUR 204.8 million as a result of the strategic alternatives process for the cell therapy business.

Additionally, there was also an EUR 135.5 million impact related to the strategic reorganization announced in January 2025. This EUR 135.5 million is comprised of severance cost of EUR 47.5 million, cost for early termination of collaborations of EUR 45.5 million, impairment on fixed assets related to small molecules activities of EUR 9.5 million, deal cost of EUR 21.4 million, accelerated non-cash cost recognition of subscription rights plans related to good leavers of EUR 9.8 million, and other operating expenses of EUR 1.8 million. Net other financial income for the first nine months of 2025 amounted to EUR 30.4 million, compared to net other financial income of EUR 71.7 million for the first nine months of 2024.

Interest income amounted to EUR 31.4 million for the first nine months of 2025, compared to EUR 70.6 million of interest income for the first nine months of 2024, due to a decrease in the interest rates and a shift from investments in term deposits generating financial income to investments in money market funds generating fair value adjustments. Notably, fair value gains and interest income derived from cash, cash equivalents, and current financial investments, excluding any currency exchange rate impact, amounted to EUR 77.2 million for the first nine months of 2025. Financial investments, cash, and cash equivalents totaled EUR 3.05 billion on September 30th, 2025, as compared to EUR 3.32 billion on December 31st, 2024. Our cash and cash equivalents and current financial investments included EUR 2.16 billion held in US dollars versus EUR 726.9 million on December 31st, 2024. These US dollars were translated to euros at an exchange rate of 1.174.

As we announced with our first half 2025 results, we continue to hold approximately 60% of our cash in US dollars and 40% in euros. As I mentioned, cash and investments as of 9/30/2025 was EUR 3.05 billion, representing EUR 46 per share. Looking forward, we anticipate ending 2025 with approximately EUR 2.975 billion-EUR 3.025 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and financial investments, excluding any business development activities and currency fluctuations. If the intention to wind down is confirmed and implemented following the Works Council processes, we would expect to incur the following cash impacts related to our cell therapy business. EUR 100 million-EUR 125 million of operating cash impact from Q4 2025 through 2026, with EUR 50 million-EUR 75 million of this being in 2026. EUR 150 million-EUR 200 million of one-time restructuring cash cost in 2026.

Lastly, if the intention to wind down is implemented and completed, we would expect to be cash flow neutral to positive by the end of 2026, excluding any business development activities and currency fluctuations. Now let me turn it back to Henry to wrap up. Thanks, Aaron. In summary, it has been a transformative time at Galapagos. We are committed to building a novel therapeutic pipeline that can have meaningful impact for patients. We will provide updates related to discussions with the Belgian and Dutch Works Councils as appropriate. As I mentioned, our deal funnel has been building steadily, and we will remain disciplined and will only execute on any opportunity in front of us if we believe we can create value. We are confident we have the team in place to execute and look forward to the future with optimism and purpose.

With that, thank you all for your attention, and we will now open it up for your questions. Operator. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press Star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To whisper your question, please press Star 11 again. We kindly ask participants to limit themselves to one question per person. We will now take the first question from Faisal Khurshid from Leerink Partners. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thank you for taking the question and really phenomenal presentation today. Just wanted to ask. Maybe for Aaron or for Henry. When you say that you expect to achieve cash flow neutral deposit status by year end 2026, could you talk a little bit about what the assumptions are that go into that? Sure. Sure. This is Aaron. We will.

The assumptions that go into it are primarily related to interest income, one. So we made some assumptions on interest rates based on the forward curve and our cash balance. It does not assume any BD activity. Obviously, if we use cash for BD activity or take on additional burn with any BD activity, that could impact that forecast. We also have income, as we outlined on slide 7, related to Jyseleca. We have tax credits coming in related to tax refunds from Belgium and other countries in the region. We also assume that we are through the Works Council’s process and we have implemented and completed the wind down. Got it. That’s helpful. For Henry or for Dan, you guys mentioned that you have the deal funnel is currently building.

To the extent that you’re able to speak to it, could you talk to us a little bit about what kinds of opportunities are in the deal funnel, what those look like, and your kind of level of optimism around that? Yeah. No, thanks. It’s Henry. I’ll start and I’ll turn it over to Dan. I mean, as we outlined in the prepared remarks, we’re focused on opportunities that are clinically de-risked. So we’re looking at mid to late-stage opportunities. Again, that can be M&A partnerships. We’re looking at many different structures, but it’s clear that there is a lot of capital required in biotech still. And while perhaps the access to capital has improved slightly, there are still many companies that would benefit from capital from us. Partnerships, etc. With that, maybe I’ll ask Dan to put a little bit more color around it. All right. Excuse me.

Thanks for the question. This is Dan. I would just add the therapeutic area overlay, which I think is an important one. We’re in the fortunate position, really, of not having too many legacy attachments, of being able to consider opportunities across a wide range of therapeutic areas. As Henry indicated, for the early deals, we think it’s a high priority to the extent we can to collaborate with Gilead, to go in with Gilead on deals. That brings us to look for assets or at least deals that have some anchor asset that is mutually value-creating for both of us, but also strategically aligned with Gilead’s direction. That brings us to the therapeutic areas of oncology and immunology or inflammatory disease. Got it. Okay. And then just one last one for me, if I can, just kind of maybe combining the two questions in a way.

Henry, could you speak to us about the kind of relative balance between kind of being conservative and not going for a deal and kind of getting to the status of being cash flow positive versus doing BD? How do you kind of balance those two priorities in a way? I think they’re both really key focus areas. I mean, we have to get through the Works Council process that we outlined as quickly as we can and then leverage, again, the broad set of assets we have that Aaron outlined. So the cash balance that generates interest, the good growing and attractive royalty stream we’re getting, the tax benefits. That sets the base. Look, the intent is to ultimately use our cash balance to find opportunities that create a positive return and incremental return on that cash balance.

As we’ve outlined, we have EUR 46 per share in cash, and we’re trading, obviously, at a much, much lower number. To the extent we can put that cash to work and create a return on that cash, I think there’s tremendous upside in our story here. That’s what we’re focused on. Got it. Thank you for taking questions and appreciate the level of detail that you were able to provide today. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Brian Abrahams from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for that really clear presentation, and thanks for taking my question. I’m curious if we could talk about what your expectations would be for Gilead to contribute to the deal process.

Really, in terms of their expertise, would this be kind of expertise in identifying a transaction, or might you expect commitment to providing resources or expertise on development prior to a formal opt-in? And then just secondarily, really quickly, in the past, I think you’ve talked about virology as another area that might be of interest. You didn’t mention it today. Just wondering if we should assume that that’s not as high a priority as oncology and immunology and inflammation. Thanks. Yeah, Brian, it’s Henry. Thanks for the question. On the first part, I’d say, again, I’m incredibly pleased with the relationship that we’ve strengthened with Gilead. On several of the opportunities that we’ve looked at, they have contributed really along the lines of what you’ve talked about, both their diligence expertise in looking at those opportunities. They’ve offered capital, both upfront and.

In some cases, if there’s a portfolio of assets, to take some of these assets and develop them at Gilead, leveraging their infrastructure. It can really take many forms. I think the bigger point is that I think they’re coming to the table, as are we, with a very constructive sort of win-win attitude, and that can take many different forms. We do not have to limit ourselves to that current partnership agreement where we would do the deal and then they would opt into certain opportunities. It can be really a much broader situation. Again, we’re quite pleased with their commitment in our working relationship. I’ll ask Dan maybe to talk about the therapeutic area and the question on virology. Yeah, that’s fair. Thanks, Henry. Thanks also for the question. Before that, I’ll reiterate Henry’s point.

I mean, we will make our own decisions about deals that we do. We will do our own careful diligence on key aspects of any asset we consider bringing in. In terms of the question about virology, I would say you’re correct that it is of lower priority. I wouldn’t say we would necessarily rule it out, but this is an area of enormous strength for Gilead. Frankly, our funnel is very, very nicely filling with oncology and I&I already. Thanks so much. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Field N’To from TD Cowan. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for taking our question. Just one question on the Gilead relationship. We understand the strengths of working with Gilead due to their expertise and the commitments you have through the OLCA agreement.

It seems like one potential drawback would be speed in collaborating and getting to a decision point. In the past, we’ve seen big organizations take a long time to sometimes make decisions. How is that contemplated in your strategy? Are there ways that you can assure that Gilead’s ready when you need them and the two of you even collaborating can be competitively fast? Thanks. Yeah. Phillips, Henry. Good observation. We have to be fair. Yes, that does create some complexity. That is a fair comment. I think it goes back to having a very collaborative relationship. Gilead is represented on our board, so they see some of the activity we’re doing. Again, as I said, I’m very pleased with the ongoing dialogue we have. The more we can do in terms of working together and doing.

Joint work ahead of making a formal approach to a company, as an example, or tabling an offer term sheet, if we can, in a way, sort of pre-wire some of what it would look like in terms of us and Gilead, then it really shouldn’t impact the process ultimately with a potential partner or target. Yes, we do have to acknowledge there’s some additional complexity. I guess the last thing I’d say is, look, we’ve built a team here that has been through many, many very, very complex BD transactions. It’s nothing that anybody here hasn’t done in prior context. I think on a combined basis, I feel we have just a phenomenal team to work through that complexity. Fair enough. Thanks for taking our question. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Jason Scarberry from Bank of America Securities.

Please go ahead. Hey, guys. This is Chi for Jason. Thanks for taking our question. There’s obviously a lot of focus on bolstering the pipeline from external means. My question is actually on the internal existing pipeline. Can you talk about the potential plans for 3667 upon completion of the two phase 3 enabling studies in lupus and dermatomyositis? Are you leaning towards divesting the asset in favor of BD activities? How might the different data scenarios help inform that decision? I’m also wondering, do you have any refined thought on the strategy for dermatomyositis given the requisite and the top-line results from the VELA study in DM? Thanks so much. Yeah. Yeah. It’s Henry. Thanks for the question, Chi.

The company prior to us arriving had started a process talking to potential partners about 3667, just recognizing that if that asset has the type of data in phase two that would enable a comprehensive phase three program. That would take expertise and resources that we currently do not have. In that context, a partnering process was started earlier in the year. Given we are so close to data now, with data expected early next year, that process is currently not active. I think it is something we would come back to. To answer your question, I think we would look at the data very carefully, and then we would think through what are the capabilities required if there is a path forward and who is best positioned to maximize the value. That may well not be us. That may well be one of the players with established.

Infrastructure. That is sort of how we would look at that. As to your specific question on dermatomyositis, I mean, of course, we are paying close attention to the TYK2 landscape and the other landscape in I&I that impacts these diseases. We will look at what the target product profile is and what the bars we need to meet in these phase two studies. The team’s all over that. All of that will go into a decision sometime early next year in terms of the next steps for 3667. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Sean McCutcheon from Raymond James. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning, team. This is Yang for Sean. We have a question on the cell therapy window process. Could you please walk us through the timeline for the window and the continuing efforts in this process?

Also, do you think you may get some additional interest getting the update on the incoming ASH? Thank you. Yeah. No, thank you for the question. Again, I recognize that for many American investors or analysts, you may not be as familiar with the way the process works in Europe. In Europe, the board can really only form an intention to wind down, and that intention is subject to consultation with Works Council. You are essentially explaining to Works Council what the rationale is, why it is the best decision for the company. That process usually takes several months. As we said in our prepared remarks, it is hard to predict exactly how long that takes, but we expect that to be concluded in Q1. That is what we can say about that. During the process, we are open to receiving viable proposals.

As we said in the prepared remarks, at this point, nobody’s come to the table with committed financing. As I said, it would take several hundred million EUR of committed financing to not only take the business forward but stand behind what are pretty sizable employee obligations. We, of course, are going to treat our employees very fairly in all of this. Again, if an offer does emerge during this process, we’re quite open to considering it. We hope to have resolution here in Q1. We’ll, of course, keep the market posted as we make progress in these consultations with Works Council. I hope that answers your question. Got it. Yeah. That’s very helpful. Thanks. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Jacob Mekhael from KBC Securities. Please go ahead. Hi there.

Thank you for taking my question. I have one on the topic of BD. You mentioned that you will go after de-risked programs with proof of concept. I’m just curious, how will you ensure that you obtain such programs in a cost-effective way? Perhaps, are you prepared to pay a bit more in order to get access to the best programs and targets? Yeah. It’s Henry. Let me start on that question. We’re going to be quite financially disciplined. At the end of the day, it’s really about, do we see an opportunity that we think allows us to create value from here? Again, that may well involve partnering with Gilead on the basis we outlined. Where on a combined basis, maybe we can see that incremental value that would be hard to realize for other parties.

At the end of the day, yes, when you are ultimately the party that does the transaction, generally speaking, you’re going to pay more than everybody else. Otherwise, you won’t be able to do the deal. Again, I’m quite confident given the environment and given how our deal funnel is building, we’ll find those opportunities. We’re going to be quite disciplined. If it takes another quarter or two or three to find the right deal, it’ll take another quarter or two or three. We’re not going to rush into anything. Of course, I recognize shareholders and analysts want some clarity of what the deal is and what the pipeline looks going forward. We’re not going to compromise on the financial criteria that we’ll use to analyze the deal. Did that answer your question? Yeah. Yeah. Very clear. Thank you.

Maybe just to follow up on that. Given that. Any deal that you would take over, you’d need to continue developing it till approval, either by yourself or in collaboration with Gilead. Can you share anything on how much capacity for deal-making does that leave you with? Yeah. No, it’s a good comment. So look, our. Roughly EUR 3.1 billion is really a phenomenal starting point. Plus, again, these other assets that are helping us get to a positive cash flow on top of that. Yes, of course, we need to reserve some capacity for. What might be. Phase two B or phase three spend for any asset we bring in. That is absolutely. Part of the deal modeling we’re doing. That’s the comments we made earlier. Again, if we dedicate.

A large portion of that capital into one opportunity, we really have to be quite confident that that opportunity will create value. If we spread the risk over several opportunities, maybe we could have a slightly different perspective. The ongoing development requirements are absolutely something that we’re quite focused on. There again, this is where the partnership with Gilead could come in, where we might be able to split some of those ongoing requirements and on a joint basis come up with a mutually value-creating structure. Okay. Thank you very much. Hopefully. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Sebastiaan van der Schoot from Van Lanschot Kempen. Please go ahead. Hey. Good afternoon, team. Thank you for the clear and comprehensive presentation of today. Really clear on the strategy. I just had one question for our side.

Can you provide some clarity on whether potential transactions, whether they would also bring in R&D capabilities, or is that something that you do not want to take on with the newer transactions? Thank you. Yeah. Sebastian, it is Henry. That is a very good question. Again, one of the, I think, very attractive features we have here at Galapagos is that we can be flexible on what that looks like. It could be that, yes, with an acquisition, there might come a very capable team. In fact, it might be very attractive for certain teams just to join us at Galapagos and essentially stay intact and continue to work on their asset. It might also be that our capital just enables an external party to continue to do the work, and we will not have that capability at the company, but we essentially fund that existing capability at a third party.

Honestly, we’re not focused on one over the other. I think it’s whatever is right for any opportunity, whatever’s the best way to create value. I will say we do have the tick-two development team still in place. That does give us a starting point if we wanted to build it further from there. Again, it really depends on the opportunity, and we want to be open to whatever creates the most value going forward. Got it. I’m just wondering whether, if you compare it to the past, whether Gilead’s involvement in the vetting process for potential transactions has increased compared to before. Maybe you can comment on that. I don’t want to really talk about the past. I’m really more focused on how we’re moving forward and how we create value from here.

I think to this question and also the question that I think Phil asked a little bit earlier, I do think it’s important that we coordinate with Gilead on these joint opportunities. Yes, that involves talking to them, meeting them, understanding mutually how we can create value on certain transactions. Again, I can’t talk about the past. I can only talk about the future. As I think we’ve been clear on, we don’t have to go through Gilead. We don’t have to work on everything with Gilead. We think for opportunities that are jointly aligned, that can create more value for our shareholders than doing it on our own. I think our approach will be to continue to work with them very collaboratively. Again, I’m quite pleased with how that’s going. They’re coming really with a kind of a can-do attitude.

We plan on continuing that approach. Super. Thanks, guys. Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star one and one. We will now take the next question from the line of Delphine Ledouxette from Bernstein. Please go ahead. Okay. Yes. Hello. Can you hear me well? Yep. We can hear you fine. Perfect. Hello. Hi. Good morning, everybody. Thank you very much for the presentation. I was wondering, a bit of a follow-up regarding the Gilead partnership. Regarding their investment, which was so far mostly philanthropic, I was wondering how long the, will last for or will take place for now. Is it something like a five-year agreement that you have in mind, or is it shorter, three-year times? I was also wondering, what is the underlying KPI? Is it a number? Is it a number of assets?

Is it a progress in the pipeline? Can you be more specific on that, please? Okay. We heard a little bit of background noise. I think you asked, what’s the length of the Gilead agreement? Is that the question? In a way, no, because Gilead is obviously a preferred partner so far and will help you in the selection. Obviously, I’m asking, will that last for three, five years, or what is the underlying KPI? Is it a program number? Is it a number of assets? Is it a progress in the pipeline? What is the underlying we should have in mind? Okay. Yeah. I’m sorry. There was a lot of background noise, but let me attempt to—let me attempt to answer your question. What we’re talking about is what we call the OLCA agreement.

That is that broad collaboration agreement that was signed roughly six, six and a half years ago. That was a 10-year agreement. That has another, call it, three and a half years running. It is that agreement that provides. Gilead. Donc, c’est dans ta guidance au départ que tu es que STO doit être marginalement positif. Tu avais zéro pour. Yeah. Sorry. We’re getting a lot of background noise. Again, to stick with the answer, that agreement has another about three and a half years running. It is really that period that we are focused on that goes back to the original deal six and a half years ago. In terms of KPIs, again, that agreement was entered with a view toward Gilead having the ability of opting into programs that came out of the Galapagos research platform.

Now, of course, with time moving on, this is no longer the current situation today. Now it’s really more about business development that we would be doing and working with Gilead in this period, as we’ve outlined, to jointly complete transactions that will create value for them, but very importantly, of course, for our company as well. Did that answer your question? All right. Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Thank you very much. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I would like to turn back over to Glenn Schulman for closing remarks. Thanks, Sandra. And thanks to everyone for your time today and your attention. As the team discussed, there’s indeed a bright future as we continue to undergo these transformations at Galapagos.

For your awareness, I wanted to mention that our corporate events calendar is provided here in the deck and also posted on our investor website. With respect to upcoming investor conferences, the team will be hosting a Fireside Chat in two weeks at the Jefferies London Conference on Wednesday, November 19. Looking ahead to 2026 already, the team will be attending the annual JP Morgan Conference in San Francisco and the TD Cowen Conference next March up in Boston. Please feel free to reach out to your respective bankers to request a meeting with the team, or you can reach out to me directly to find a time to catch up. Thanks, everyone, and have a great day. This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.