Merck & Co: Blockbuster Drugs

Sector

PharmaHealthcare

Background

Ashwin Varma is a medical student at UT Health San Antonio. We cover Merck's early history and how it became a juggernaut under the leadership of Ray Vogelos, what makes its Keytruda cancer treatment drug so unique, and the lessons about drug development and biotech investing that can be learned from its success.

Cover

Date

October 30, 2024

Episode Number

189

Background / Overview

Merck’s history traces back to the 17th century as a German pharmacy, with its U.S. arm established in the early 1900s. The modern U.S. Merck, founded by George Merck post-World War I, became a pharmaceutical powerhouse during World War II through the penicillin project, which catalyzed the industry’s R&D focus. Under CEO Roy Vagelos in the 1980s and 1990s, Merck achieved unparalleled success, launching blockbuster drugs like statins and ACE inhibitors, growing sales from $2 billion in 1980 to $40 billion by 2000. However, the 2000s were challenging due to pipeline failures and the Vioxx lawsuit, leading to a 40% stock decline and sales halving to $20 billion by 2010. Since 2010, Merck has rebounded, driven by Keytruda, a monoclonal antibody generating $25 billion annually, nearly 50% of its $60 billion revenue in 2023.

Merck operates primarily in pharmaceuticals ($53 billion revenue) and animal health ($5.5–6 billion), having divested women’s health and biosimilars into Organon in 2021. Its pharmaceutical segment is dominated by oncology (Keytruda) and vaccines (e.g., Gardasil, $8.8 billion). Headquartered in Rahway, New Jersey, Merck employs approximately 70,000 people and invests heavily in R&D, spending $13.5 billion (20% of sales) in 2022.

Ownership / Recent Valuation

Merck is publicly traded (NYSE: MRK) with a market cap of $285 billion as of 2023. No specific ownership details (e.g., private equity sponsors) are provided, but its scale and public status suggest institutional ownership dominates. Recent acquisitions, such as Acceleron ($11 billion, 2021) and Prometheus ($10 billion, 2023), reflect aggressive capital deployment to bolster its pipeline. Valuation multiples are not explicitly stated, but the high market cap relative to $60 billion revenue implies a price-to-sales ratio of ~4.75x, typical for pharma giants with strong IP and growth prospects.

Key Products / Services / Value Proposition

Merck’s core value proposition lies in developing innovative, patent-protected drugs addressing high unmet medical needs, particularly in oncology and vaccines. Its key products include:

1. Keytruda ($25 billion, ~42% of revenue): A monoclonal antibody (biologic) targeting PD-1, approved for 40 cancer indications (e.g., non-small cell lung cancer, melanoma). Its value stems from unmatched clinical data breadth, enabling premium pricing ($191,000 list price) and high patient volumes across multiple lines of therapy (neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic).
2. Gardasil ($8.8 billion, ~15% of revenue): A vaccine preventing HPV-related cervical cancer, nearly eliminating such cancers in vaccinated populations. Its value lies in public health impact and consistent demand.
3. Other Vaccines ($4 billion): Includes vaccines for viral diseases, leveraging Merck’s legacy expertise.
4. Smaller Products: Includes a diabetes drug and a less successful COVID-19 drug.

Segments and Revenue Model

Merck operates two main segments:

1. Pharmaceuticals ($53 billion, 88% of revenue): Dominated by Keytruda (oncology) and vaccines. Revenue is driven by patented drugs sold to insurers via Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs), with pricing power derived from IP protection and clinical differentiation.
2. Animal Health ($5.5–6 billion, 10% of revenue): A legacy business providing veterinary drugs, less R&D-intensive but stable.

Revenue Model: Merck generates revenue through:

• Volume: Expanding indications (e.g., Keytruda’s 40 approvals) and lines of therapy increase patient numbers.
• Pricing: Patent protection ensures pricing power, with Keytruda’s list price at $191,000 (net price slightly lower due to rebates). Pricing is negotiated with PBMs, influenced by clinical data breadth and lack of substitutes.
• Recurring Revenue: Vaccines like Gardasil generate stable, recurring revenue due to public health mandates.

Splits and Mix

• Product Mix: Keytruda dominates (42%), followed by Gardasil (15%), other vaccines (7%), and animal health (10%). Smaller drugs (e.g., diabetes, COVID-19) contribute the rest.
• Geo Mix: Not detailed, but Merck’s global presence suggests significant U.S. and European revenue, with emerging markets growing.
• Customer Mix: Primarily insurers/PBMs, with some direct government purchases for vaccines.
• Channel Mix: Sales occur through PBM negotiations, with marketing via sales reps and physician education.
• End-Market Mix: Oncology (42%), vaccines (22%), animal health (10%).

Mix Shifts: Keytruda’s revenue share has grown from near-zero in 2014 to 42% in 2023, driven by indication expansion. Post-2028, its share may decline due to patent expiry, with new drugs (e.g., Sotatercept) expected to rise.

KPIs

• Revenue Growth: Keytruda’s sales grew from $0 in 2014 to $25 billion in 2023, driven by volume (new indications) and pricing (list price from $140,000 to $191,000).
• Pipeline Strength: Number of Phase I–III trials, with 70–80% of pipeline drugs externally sourced.
• IP Duration: Keytruda’s patent expires in 2028; extent of revenue erosion is critical.
• Acquisition Activity: 12 transactions since 2019, ranging from $250 million to $10 billion.

Headline Financials

Revenue Trajectory: Revenue grew from $20 billion in 2010 to $60 billion in 2023, driven by Keytruda’s rise. Keytruda’s growth is volume-driven (40 indications, expanded therapy lines), with pricing increases contributing marginally. Vaccines provide stable growth, while animal health is flat.

Cost Trajectory / Operating Leverage:

• Variable Costs: Low manufacturing costs (5–10% of sales for biologics, <1% for small molecules). Royalties and rebates to PBMs add to COGS.
• Fixed Costs: High R&D ($13.5 billion, 20% of sales) and marketing (16% of sales). Fixed costs create operating leverage, as revenue growth outpaces cost increases, boosting EBITDA margins to 30%.
• Profit Margins: Gross margins (73%) are industry-leading due to low production costs. EBITDA margins (30%) reflect heavy R&D and marketing but benefit from scale.

Capital Intensity and Allocation:

• Capex: Not detailed, but pharma is R&D-intensive, not capex-heavy. Manufacturing biologics requires bioreactors, but costs are modest relative to revenue.
• R&D: $13.5 billion annually, expensed on P&L, not capitalized, lowering reported ROIC but reflecting long-term investment.
• M&A: Aggressive inorganic growth (e.g., Acceleron $11 billion, Prometheus $10 billion) to counter Keytruda’s patent cliff. Since 2019, 12 deals totaling billions.
• FCF: High EBITDA margins suggest strong FCF, but heavy R&D and M&A reduce cash available for dividends or buybacks.

Value Chain Position

Merck operates midstream in the pharmaceutical value chain, focusing on drug discovery, development, and commercialization. Its primary activities include:

• R&D: Preclinical research and clinical trials (Phase I–III).
• Manufacturing: Producing small molecules (low-cost) and biologics (moderate-cost).
• Marketing/Sales: Engaging PBMs, physicians, and regulators.

GTM Strategy: Merck negotiates with PBMs for pricing, leverages sales reps for physician education, and uses marketing (e.g., TV ads) to build awareness. Its competitive advantage lies in clinical data breadth (e.g., Keytruda’s 40 indications), enabling premium pricing and market dominance.

Value-Add: Merck’s differentiation stems from its ability to develop and commercialize drugs for high unmet needs, backed by robust IP and clinical execution.

Customers and Suppliers

• Customers: Primarily PBMs and insurers, with governments for vaccines. End-users (patients) have little direct influence due to insurance coverage.
• Suppliers: Raw materials for small molecules are commoditized. Biologics require specialized cell lines and bioreactors, but Merck likely controls key processes in-house.

Pricing

Pricing is driven by:

• IP Protection: Patents provide a pricing floor, preventing generics.
• Clinical Differentiation: Keytruda’s 40 indications justify a $191,000 list price, with minimal rebates due to limited substitutes.
• PBM Negotiations: Rebates reduce net price, but Keytruda’s uniqueness minimizes discounts.
• Unmet Need: High prices for conditions like cancer or pulmonary arterial hypertension reflect life-saving value.

Contract Structure: Long-term supply agreements with PBMs ensure revenue visibility, with pricing tied to clinical outcomes and indication breadth.

Bottoms-Up Drivers

Revenue Model & Drivers

Merck generates $1 of revenue by:

• Selling Keytruda ($0.42): High-volume sales to cancer patients across 40 indications, priced at $191,000 annually.
• Selling Vaccines ($0.22): Gardasil and other vaccines sold to governments and insurers for public health programs.
• Animal Health ($0.10): Stable sales of veterinary drugs.

Revenue Drivers:

• Volume: Keytruda’s growth is driven by expanding indications (from melanoma in 2014 to 40 cancers) and therapy lines (second-line to neoadjuvant). Gardasil benefits from consistent vaccination rates.
• Pricing: Keytruda’s list price rose from $140,000 to $191,000, with net price close to list due to limited competition. Vaccine pricing is stable.
• Mix: Oncology’s share (42%) has risen, while vaccines and animal health remain steady. Post-2028, new drugs (e.g., Sotatercept) may shift mix.
• Organic Growth: Keytruda’s organic growth is strong, but 70–80% of pipeline drugs are externally sourced via M&A.

Cost Structure & Drivers

• Variable Costs: Manufacturing costs are low (5–10% of sales for biologics, <1% for small molecules). Royalties and PBM rebates add to COGS.
• Fixed Costs: R&D (20% of sales, $13.5 billion) and marketing (16% of sales) dominate. Fixed costs create operating leverage, as revenue growth outpaces cost increases.
• EBITDA Margin: 30%, driven by high gross margins (73%) and scale. Incremental margins improve with revenue growth, reflecting leverage.

FCF Drivers

• Net Income: High EBITDA margins (30%) support strong net income, but taxes and interest reduce cash flow.
• Capex: Modest, focused on manufacturing facilities.
• NWC: Stable, with short cash conversion cycles due to predictable PBM payments.
• FCF: Strong but reinvested into R&D and M&A, limiting dividends/buybacks.

Capital Deployment

• M&A: 12 deals since 2019, including Acceleron ($11 billion) and Prometheus ($10 billion), targeting high unmet need indications.
• Organic R&D: $13.5 billion annually, with 70–80% of pipeline externally sourced.
• Buybacks/Dividends: Not emphasized, as cash is prioritized for growth.

Market, Competitive Landscape, Strategy

Market Size and Growth

• Global Pharma Market: ~$1.5 trillion, growing at 4–6% CAGR, driven by aging populations, cancer prevalence, and innovation.
• Oncology Segment: ~$200 billion, growing at 8–10% CAGR due to rising cancer rates and immunotherapy adoption. Keytruda holds ~12.5% market share.
• Vaccine Market: ~$60 billion, growing at 5–7% CAGR, driven by public health mandates.

Market Structure

• Oncology: Fragmented but consolidating, with Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Regeneron leading. High R&D barriers limit new entrants.
• Vaccines: Oligopolistic, with Merck, Pfizer, and GSK dominating due to scale and regulatory hurdles.
• Animal Health: Stable, with fewer competitors due to lower margins.

Competitive Positioning

Merck is a leader in oncology (Keytruda) and vaccines (Gardasil), with a strong pipeline diversifying into autoimmune diseases and pulmonary arterial hypertension. Its differentiation lies in clinical execution (e.g., Keytruda’s rapid trial success) and IP management.

Hamilton’s 7 Powers Analysis

1. Economies of Scale: Moderate. Merck’s R&D and marketing scale reduces costs per drug, but high fixed costs (20% R&D) limit leverage compared to tech.
2. Network Effects: None. Pharma lacks user-driven network effects.
3. Branding: Strong. Merck’s reputation for innovation supports premium pricing and physician trust.
4. Counter-Positioning: Strong. Keytruda’s clinical data breadth (40 indications) creates a unique value proposition, difficult for competitors to replicate.
5. Cornered Resource: Strong. Keytruda’s IP and clinical data are exclusive, with biosimilars facing replication challenges.
6. Process Power: Strong. Merck’s clinical trial execution (e.g., overtaking BMS in PD-1) is a core competency.
7. Switching Costs: Moderate. Physicians prefer Keytruda due to familiarity and data, but biosimilars post-2028 could disrupt loyalty.

Competitive Forces (Porter’s Five Forces)

• New Entrants: Low threat. High R&D costs ($100 million/trial), regulatory barriers, and IP protection deter entry.
• Substitutes: Moderate threat. Biosimilars post-2028 and new drugs (e.g., Summit’s Ivonescimab) pose risks, but Keytruda’s data breadth limits impact.
• Supplier Power: Low. Raw materials are commoditized; biologics production is in-house.
• Buyer Power: Moderate. PBMs negotiate rebates, but Keytruda’s uniqueness limits discounts.
• Rivalry: High. BMS, Regeneron, and AstraZeneca compete intensely, but Merck’s clinical execution maintains leadership.

Strategic Logic

• Capex/R&D Bets: Aggressive M&A (e.g., Acceleron, Prometheus) and R&D ($13.5 billion) to diversify pipeline, mitigating Keytruda’s patent cliff.
• Economies of Scale: Merck leverages R&D and marketing scale but avoids diseconomies by focusing on high-margin segments.
• Vertical Integration: Limited; Merck focuses on R&D and commercialization, outsourcing some manufacturing.
• Horizontal Expansion: Diversifying into autoimmune diseases and pulmonary arterial hypertension via acquisitions.

Valuation and Market Overview

• Valuation: $285 billion market cap, ~4.75x price-to-sales. High valuation reflects Keytruda’s cash flows and pipeline potential, but 2028 patent cliff introduces risk.
• Market Growth: Oncology (8–10% CAGR) and vaccines (5–7% CAGR) support long-term growth, but Keytruda’s revenue erosion could cap upside.
• Risks: Patent cliff (80% revenue loss possible), pipeline failures, political scrutiny on pricing, and competitive threats (e.g., Ivonescimab).
• Opportunities: New drugs (Sotatercept: $2–9 billion potential; Prometheus drug for autoimmune diseases) and antibody-drug conjugates could offset losses.

Key Takeaways and Unique Dynamics

1. Keytruda’s Dominance: Keytruda’s $25 billion revenue (42% of total) is unprecedented, driven by 40 indications and therapy line expansion. Its clinical data breadth creates a moat, enabling premium pricing ($191,000) and resilience against substitutes.
2. Patent Cliff Risk: The 2028 patent expiry threatens 80% revenue erosion (small molecule-like) or gradual decline (Humira-like). Biosimilars face replication challenges, but regulatory changes (interchangeable biosimilars) and political scrutiny increase risk.
3. R&D and M&A Strategy: Merck’s shift to 70–80% externally sourced pipeline (vs. 70% internal in 1995) reflects industry trends. Acquisitions like Acceleron ($11 billion) and Prometheus ($10 billion) diversify into high unmet need areas, balancing risk.
4. High Margin, High Risk: 73% gross margins and 30% EBITDA margins reflect low manufacturing costs and operating leverage, but R&D intensity (20% of sales) and pipeline uncertainty create volatility.
5. Clinical Execution as Core Competency: Merck’s ability to overtake BMS in PD-1 trials demonstrates superior trial management, a critical differentiator in pharma.
6. Diversification Imperative: Leadership’s focus on non-oncology indications (e.g., pulmonary arterial hypertension, autoimmune diseases) mitigates reliance on Keytruda, addressing the historical challenge of replacing blockbusters.

Unique Dynamics:

• Pipeline-in-a-Drug: Keytruda’s ability to address 40 indications across multiple therapy lines is rare, creating a “pipeline-in-a-drug” that drives volume and pricing power.
• Biologics vs. Small Molecules: Keytruda’s biologic nature (harder to replicate) offers better post-patent revenue retention than small molecules, but regulatory and political risks loom.
• External R&D Reliance: Merck’s heavy M&A strategy (12 deals since 2019) reflects a structural shift in pharma, where internal R&D is supplemented by acquiring undervalued biotech assets.
• Clinical Data Moat: Keytruda’s unmatched clinical data breadth creates a competitive moat, as PBMs and physicians prioritize proven efficacy, limiting substitute adoption.

This breakdown highlights Merck’s unique position as a Keytruda-driven oncology leader navigating a critical patent cliff. Its strategic diversification, clinical execution, and high-margin model position it well, but pipeline success and post-2028 revenue retention remain pivotal. The business exemplifies the high-stakes, hits-driven nature of pharma, where differentiation and execution drive outsized returns.

Transcript