The companies on the Global 500 employ 70.2 million people, and their revenue represents more than one-third of the world’s GDP.

Fortune Global 500

With a combined revenue of $21 trillion and $2.1 trillion in profits, the 2026 Fortune 500 is the definitive list of America's largest companies.

Fortune 500

The 300 companies on this year’s list brought in over $12.5 trillion in revenue for the latest 12 months, with the median revenue figure at $24 billion.

America's Most Innovative Companies

AI is a major force shaping this year’s list—but it’s far from the only story.

World's Most Admired Companies

The corporations on our annual list of the world's 500 largest companies combined to generate $41.7 trillion in revenue over the past year.

Almost $20 trillion in revenue—and a record-breaking $1.87 trillion in profits. Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500, the definitive list of the biggest companies in America.

The 300 companies on this year’s list brought in over $12.6 trillion in revenue for the latest 12 months, with the median revenue figure at $22 billion.

Leaders in all industries rely more than ever on Big Tech—and appreciate the giants that deliver, at scale, without drama.

The corporations on our annual list posted aggregate revenues of $41 trillion for the second year in a row.

Industries included in the sector are insurance and managed care, medical products and facilities, pharmacy services, and pharmaceutical companies.

Fortune Sector Leaders: Health Care

The Fortune 500, in its 70th year in 2024, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

The 200 companies on this list are transforming industries from the inside out.

The 26th edition of the list shows how much esteem Big Tech giants command among other business leaders.

WMA-2024-Pfizer

The 25th Fortune World’s Most Admired Companies list suggests that tech giants’ peers respect them as much as ever.

WMAC 2023-Pfizer

The corporations on our annual list of the world’s largest companies delivered a record $41 trillion in aggregate revenues.

The 300 companies on this list are transforming industries from the inside out.

The Fortune 500, in its 69th year in 2023, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

F500-2023-038-Pfizer

The pharmaceutical giant rode its groundbreaking mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and antiviral pill Paxlovid to record revenue in 2022; the $100.3 billion it raked in (up from $81.3 billion in 2021) catapulted the company 40 spots on this year’s Fortune 500 list. 
<ul> 
 	<li>Pfizer is planning to sell its COVID-19 vaccine commercially in 2023, rather than contracting with the U.S. government, with a target price between $110 and $130 per dose.</li> 
 	<li>Still, it expects revenue to drop as the demand for COVID vaccines eases in 2023. Pfizer has a slate of other new drugs in its pipeline, such as the Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) vaccine and medication for migraines.</li> 
 	<li>The company is expected to lose patent protections for some key drugs, including Ibrance, used for breast cancer treatment, between 2025 and 2030.</li> 
 	<li>It has acquired other biotech or smaller pharma companies to bolster its pipeline in the future. Key 2022 deals include the $5.4 billion purchase of Global Blood Therapeutics and the $11.6 billion acquisition of Biohaven.</li> 
</ul>

Industrials came out on top this year, with 22 companies featured on the list.

100 Fastest-Growing Companies

Just as it dominates our economy, Big Tech now dominates Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation.

WMAC-2022-04-Pfizer

Aggregate sales hit $37.8 trillion last year—an increase of 19%, the highest annual growth rate in the list’s history.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 68th running of the list.

F500 2022-Pfizer

Pfizer’s role in responding to COVID-19 has returned it to the forefront of the pharmaceutical industry—and helped it climb 34 spots on the Fortune 500 this year. As of April 2022, approximately 3.3 billion Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines had been shipped to 179 countries, and some 338 million doses had been administered in the U.S. alone. From 2020 to 2021 its revenue nearly doubled, to $81.3 billion, with the vaccine accounting for the bulk of that gain. Pfizer’s oral antiviral pill, Paxlovid, which has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization or death from COVID by about 90%, is likely to join the vaccine in boosting its bottom line: As of April 2022, the Biden administration has committed to purchasing 20 million treatment courses of Paxlovid.

After a year in which humanity leaned more heavily than ever on tech giants, see which companies topped Fortune's ranking of corporate reputation.

Total revenue for the world’s biggest companies fell 4.8% to $31.7 trillion this year—the first decline in half a decade.

<span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;How do you balance being one of the world’s saviors during a pandemic without being perceived as gloating or, more important, gouging a global population in need? That’s the tricky needle Pfizer has had to thread, given the company’s status as one of the most effective coronavirus vaccine manufacturers in the world. Pfizer recorded 2020 revenues of about $42 billion—but that largely excludes the post-winter period, when Pfizer’s COVID vaccine was granted emergency use authorization by the FDA. The company expects to bring in $26 billion in COVID vaccine sales alone this year, about 60% of its total 2020 revenues, thanks to its sprawling relationships with governments and pandemic-focused organizations across the globe. An added benefit? Via its partnership with Germany’s BioNTech, the maker of the “little blue pill” is now synonymous with mRNA vaccine technology that could feed its pipeline in infectious disease treatments and other therapeutics for years to come.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:12673,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;10&quot;:2,&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;16&quot;:11}">How do you balance being one of the world’s saviors during a pandemic without being perceived as gloating or, more important, gouging a global population in need? That’s the tricky needle Pfizer has had to thread, given the company’s status as one of the most effective coronavirus vaccine manufacturers in the world. Pfizer recorded 2020 revenues of about $42 billion—but that largely excludes the post-winter period, when Pfizer’s COVID vaccine was granted emergency use authorization by the FDA. The company expects to bring in $26 billion in COVID vaccine sales alone this year, about 60% of its total 2020 revenues, thanks to its sprawling relationships with governments and pandemic-focused organizations across the globe. An added benefit? Via its partnership with Germany’s BioNTech, the maker of the “little blue pill” is now synonymous with mRNA vaccine technology that could feed its pipeline in infectious disease treatments and other therapeutics for years to come.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 67th running of the list.

F500-2021-77-Pfizer

For an astounding 13th straight year, Apple claims the top spot in Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation, based on a survey of almost 3,800 executives, directors, and analysts.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $33.3 trillion in revenues and $2.1 trillion in profits.

G500-2020-215-Pfizer

Pfizer slips 17 spots this year, in large part because of the expiration last year of one of its more lucrative patents, for the fibromyalgia drug Lyrica. That eroded the drugmaker's revenue, which fell 4% overall in 2019. But Pfizer also made some big moves: After years of rumors that it would split up, Pfizer finally slimmed down, announcing over the summer that it would merge Upjohn, its off-patent drug division, with general drug company Mylan. Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical giant found some significant efficiencies in its operations: profits surged some 46%. The company, which is developing a promising COVID-19 vaccine in partnership with German drug company BioNTech, in July announced the U.S. government had ordered $1.95 billion worth of doses of the new treatment—to provide it to Americans for free, if the FDA approves the vaccine.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 66th running of the list.

F500-2020-064-Pfizer

Pfizer slipped a few spots, in large part because of the expiration last year of one of its more lucrative patents, for the fibromyalgia drug Lyrica. That eroded the drugmaker's revenue, which fell 4% overall in 2019. But Pfizer also made some big moves: After years of rumors that it would split up, Pfizer finally slimmed down, announcing over the summer that it would merge Upjohn, its off-patent drug division, with general drug company Mylan. Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical giant found some significant efficiencies in its operations: profits surged some 46%.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2019 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.7 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 65th running of the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 64th running of the list.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2017 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 63rd running of the list.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2016 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.6 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 62nd running of the list.

The world's 500 largest companies generated $31.2 trillion in revenues and $1.7 trillion in profits in 2014. Together, this year's Fortune Global 500 employ 65 million people worldwide and are represented by 36 countries.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 61st running of the list. Wal-Mart claims the top spot again. See who made the list.

Global business is back. After limping through a worldwide financial crisis and economic slowdown, the 500 largest companies ranked by revenues shattered all sorts of performance records in 2013: They racked up combined revenues of $31.1 trillion, up 2.5% from 2012, and profits soared 27% to nearly $2 trillion. China’s 95 companies (up from 89 last year) posted $5.8 trillion in revenues. The U.S. has four fewer companies on the list than last year but remains (for now) the country leader, with 128 corporations on the list—including No. 1 Wal-Mart Stores—reporting $8.6 trillion in revenues. 

Wal-Mart stayed on top as its sales crept closer to half-a-trillion dollars. Apple moved into the top five. And UnitedHealth Group continued its steady climb. 

Fastest-growing Companies

Revenue 3 Yr Growth Rank

Revenue 3 Yr Annual Growth Rate

EPS 3 Yr Growth Rank

EPS 3 Yr Annual Growth Rate

Total Return 3 Yr Rank

Total Return 3 Yr Annual Rate

Beat S&P 500 3 Yr Return

Years on List

Sector

Industry

Current All-Star Rank

Previous All-Star Rank

Industry Rank

Previous Industry Rank

Overall Score

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

Strongest Dimension

Years on list

Previous rank

State

Key Financials (last Fiscal Year)

Revenues ($M)

Profits ($M)

Assets ($M)

Total Stockholder Equity ($M)

Profit Ratios

Profit as % of Revenues

Profits as % of Assets

Profits as % of Stockholder Equity

Earnings Per Share (last Fiscal Year)

Earnings Per Share ($)

EPS % Change (from prior fiscal year)

EPS % Change (5 year annual rate)

EPS % Change (10 year annual rate)

Total Return

Total Return to Investors (last year)

Total Return to Investors (5 year, annualized)

Total Return to Investors (10 year, annualized)

Pfizer is known for developing medications and vaccines, and for manufacturing them at dozens of factories around the world. Its treatments span a broad range of areas including oncology, rare diseases, inflammation and immunology, and vaccines. Oncology has become the company's primary strategic focus, with CEO Albert Bourla committing more than 40% of annual R&amp;D spending to cancer research. Pfizer significantly expanded its cancer portfolio through its 2023 acquisition of Seagen, gaining a suite of antibody-drug conjugate therapies including Padcev for bladder cancer and Adcetris for lymphoma. The company is also making a major push into the obesity market: its late 2025 acquisition of Metsera brought Pfizer back into the obesity space after an earlier internal program was scrapped, positioning it to compete against dominant players Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Pfizer developed a landmark and highly profitable vaccine in collaboration with the startup BioNTech; it also developed a treatment for COVID infections sold as Paxlovid. Pfizer was founded in 1849 by immigrants in New York City, which remains the site of its global headquarters.

Q2 2026

Q1 2026

Q4 2025

Q3 2025

Q2 2025

Q1 2025

Q4 2024

Pfizer (PFE): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

Pfizer

pfizer

Good day, everyone, and welcome to Pfizer's fourth quarter 2025 earnings conference call. Today's call is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Francesca DeMartino, Chief Investor Relations Officer and Senior Vice President. Please go ahead, ma'am.

Good morning, and welcome to Pfizer's earnings call. I'm Francesca DeMartino, Chief Investor Relations Officer. On behalf of the Pfizer team, thank you for joining us. This call is being made available via audio webcast at pfizer.com. Earlier this morning, we released our results for the fourth quarter and full year 2025 via a press release that is available on our website at pfizer.com. I'm joined today by Dr. Albert Bourla, our Chairman and CEO, Dr. Chris Boshoff, our Chief Scientific Officer, and Dave Denton, our CFO. Albert, Chris, and Dave have some prepared remarks, and we will then open the call for questions. Members of our leadership team will be available for the Q&A session. Before we get started, I wanna remind you that we will be making forward-looking statements and discussing certain non-GAAP financial measures.

I encourage you to read the disclaimers in our slide presentation, the press release we issued this morning, and the disclosures in our SEC filings, which are all available on the IR website on pfizer.com. Forward-looking statements on the call are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties, speak only as of the call's original date, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of the statements. With that, I will turn the call over to Albert.

Thank you, Francesca. So 2025 was a very good year for Pfizer. I'm very pleased with strong execution to deliver, and frankly, over-deliver on our financial commitments. We exceeded expectations for revenues and adjusted diluted EPS, while also returning $9.8 billion to shareholders via our quarterly dividend. We grew overall operational revenue for full year 2025 when excluding COVID-19 products, achieved solid double-digit growth in recently launched and acquired products, and expanded adjusted gross margins. Strategic actions in 2025 helped us resolve significant uncertainty, including achieving greater clarity on pricing and tariffs, and demonstrating the underlying resilience of our business to deliver EPS, despite the lowest ever COVID-19 season. We achieved four key approvals, eight critical readouts, and initiated 11 pivotal studies. Our Metsera, Yao Pharma, and 3SBio deals helped strengthen our robust pipeline. Overall, 2025 reinforced how well Pfizer can execute.

We strengthen the foundation, positioning us for growth toward the end of the decade, continued impact for patient and long-term shareholder value. We have once again defined strategic priorities for the year ahead, which we presented at JPMorgan. 2026 is an important year in a pivotal investment period as we strive for industry-leading growth after several key products lose patent or regulatory exclusivity in the next few years. Seagen, Metsera, and Biohaven are the most significant strategic acquisitions in recent years. They have transformative potential for Pfizer, and we are focused on maximizing the value of in-line product portfolios and accelerating pipeline development. We made continued progress last year integrating legacy Seagen products into our commercial portfolio.

I'm also pleased with notable advances in our development programs, including a recent FDA approval for PADCEV in combination with pembro for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are ineligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. We are encouraged by the opportunity to build on this with an expected regulatory decision for patients with cisplatin-eligible MIBC. If successful, we will substantially expand the U.S. addressable population with up to approximately 22,500 additional patients across both cis-eligible and cis-ineligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer, up from about 19,000 patients in metastatic urothelial cancer. We have a clear strategy aiming for Pfizer leadership in the next generation of therapies for chronic weight management with a highly differentiated Metsera pipeline portfolio, our Yao Pharma exclusive global collaboration and licensing agreement, and other Pfizer programs such as our oral GIP antagonist candidate.

Since closing our Biohaven acquisition a few years ago, we have globally scaled a leading migraine portfolio. It strengthened our product mix to drive significant impact, both for patients and our commercial performance. Nurtec has a strong market leadership position in the oral CGRP class in 2025. In Q4, we captured 83% of new CGRP writer volume and remain the leader in new patient starts. I expect 2026 to be also a very rich year for key catalysts and to intend to deliver on our critical R&D milestones. This year, we anticipate progress with approximately 20 recently initiated and planned key pivotal studies, with 10 of them in the Metsera portfolio and four with our anti-PD-1 VEGF bispecific. Among eight expected key readouts, we anticipate one for SV, our novel potential first-in-class integrin beta-6 targeting vedotin ADC.

The readout will be in second-line plus non-squamous metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, which affects about 50,000 patients in the U.S. and more than 200,000 patients globally. We are also expecting key phase III readouts for ELREXFIO in double-class exposed relapse/refractory multiple myeloma and for our Lyme disease vaccine candidate. The foundation of our strategy in obesity and adjacent condition is targeting breakthrough medicines in what could be a $150 billion market. Earlier today, we announced encouraging results from our VESPER-3 study, which previously was known as Metsera 097i, the ultra long-acting investigational next-generation injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist. In a few moments, Chris Boshoff, our Chief Scientific Officer, will walk through additional details and our plans for advancing our obesity portfolio this year.

Oncology is another source of strength, and I'm excited by opportunities for significant progress in 2026 that would build on our established presence in breast, in genitourinary, in thoracic, and gastrointestinal cancer, and of course, blood cancers. In addition to promising programs such as the SV, our oncology team is move quickly with a robust program for 4404, the bispecific antibody licensed last year from 3SBio. We have seven near-term planned or recently started trials for 4404, including two large global phase III studies, anchoring our efforts to establish this investigational medicine as a potential backbone therapy across multiple tumor types. We're also pleased that the FDA has granted HYMPAVZI breakthrough therapy designation for investigation in younger pediatric patients aged six to 11 in hemophilia B, with or without inhibitor.

That's an important innovative medicine today, and we are investigating the full potential of HYMPAVZI to support more patients living with hemophilia. Our third strategic priority is investing to maximize post-2028 growth. We are committed to fully supporting a robust and accelerated approach to R&D, the successful commercial launch of new products, and build on business development while maintaining our robust dividend. And finally, we are scaling artificial intelligence across R&D, manufacturing, commercial, and patient engagement to improve productivity and accelerate innovation. We have been setting the foundation with AI-ready data, authentic workflows, and compute capacity. To meet the growing AI demand over the next two years, we are expanding to more than 1,200 GPUs, largely driven by R&D application of AI. In R&D, we are embedding AI across discovery, development, regulatory, and medical to increase productivity and accelerate the pipeline and timelines.

AI is optimizing supply, planning, and manufacturing, contributing to our manufacturing optimization program goals. In commercial, AI is helping to accelerate new product launches, delivering insights for dynamic targeting, and supporting personalized messaging and real-time marketing content. So with that, and after I describe the four priorities, which describe the full picture of what we plan to do in 2026, I will turn it over to Chris to discuss the news of the day, which are the ultra long-acting announcement of VESPER-3. Chris?

Thank you, Albert. It is my pleasure to discuss the VESPER-3 study results today and provide more color to our press release this morning. These data are an important advancement in our obesity portfolio because they increase significantly our confidence in the phase III monthly dosing study that we expect to start later this year. To start, I'd like to review how the structure of PF-3944 drives its long half-life. Prior GLP-1 receptor agonists that rely on albumin binding to extend half-life require dissociation from the albumin protein for optimal receptor engagement. 3944 binds the GLP-1 receptor while still bound to albumin due to lipidation at the terminal end of the amino acid chain rather than the middle. This allows for reduced clearance without reduced receptor engagement, resulting in a half-life exceeding other agents that require albumin dissociation for binding.

A key differentiator of 3944 is its extended half-life, which supports monthly dosing. Furthermore, given 3944's length of 41 amino acids, the molecule is considered a biologic and would be eligible for regulatory review via the BLA pathway. The right side of the slide shows previously reported data from the phase II-B VESPER-1 study, evaluating 3944 dosed weekly and without titration. These data show dose-dependent, placebo-adjusted weight loss of up to 14.1% at week 28, demonstrating the molecule's potential to deliver efficacy that is competitive with the standard of care and potentially best-in-class among mono agonists. In our currently ongoing weekly phase III study of 3944, VESPER-4, we are also testing a higher dose of 2.4 mg weekly. With VESPER-3, we aim to achieve two key objectives.

First, to demonstrate that we could achieve continued weight loss when switching from weekly to monthly subcutaneous injections and maintain 3944's efficacy while reducing the dosing frequency fourfold. And second, to demonstrate that 3944 could switch to a fourfold equivalent monthly dose while maintaining a well-tolerated and favorable safety profile. Today, I will walk you through these data, which demonstrate we've successfully achieved both. The VESPER-3 phase II-B study was designed to evaluate 3944 with monthly maintenance dosing following a titration period of up to 12 weeks. The study compares four different dosing regimens versus placebo, with a pre-specified interim tolerability analysis at week 12 and a primary reporting milestone at week 28.

Arm one and arm three are low and medium dose regimens that we plan to advance to phase III, and these two study arms are the focus of the data we are sharing today. Starting with our first objective, I'm pleased to share that we observed robust, statistically significant weight loss across all doses tested. At week 28, placebo-adjusted weight loss was 10% and 12.3% for our planned low and medium phase III doses, respectively. These results are shown in the blue bars and represent the trial's efficacy estimate. In the teal bars are model predictions of the potential efficacy we would expect with monthly maintenance dosing of 3944 in a study of adults with obesity or overweight and without type 2 diabetes, similar to VESPER-3. A model-based meta-analysis approach was used to generate these predictions.

This approach uses a mathematical model to capture the weight loss trajectory over time and the dose-response relationship. This model was built taking into account the observed data from the VESPER-3 trial, the available data from other 3944 clinical studies, and data from published trials of other weight loss. For the low and medium dose regimens, we see excellent concordance between our VESPER-3 clinical data in blue and our model predictions in teal. Applying the same model to project the potential efficacy of the planned phase III high-dose regimen of 9.6 milligrams monthly, we predict placebo-adjusted weight loss of nearly 16% at week 28. Note, the high dose is already being studied in the VESPER-4 phase III study as a 2.4 mg weekly dose.

Collectively, our clinical data model predictions show that 3944 can deliver robust weight loss after switching to monthly administration and suggest that we can potentially achieve increased efficacy with a higher dose. Moreover, VESPER-3 data do not show a weight loss plateau reached at week 28. Projecting continued weight loss is expected as the study continues through week 64. With these results, we are confident that 3944 has the potential to deliver efficacy that is competitive with the standard of care and potentially best in class among monoagonists, with a differentiated monthly dosing format. Next, I'll turn your attention to the second objective of VESPER-3, demonstrating a well-tolerated and favorable safety profile for 3944 when switching to a fourfold equivalent monthly dose. Similar to our first objective, I'm pleased to report that here, too, 3944 delivered.

In VESPER-3, 3944 displayed a well-tolerated and favorable safety profile that is consistent with what has been observed with weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists. Observed gastrointestinal treatment emergent adverse events were predominantly mild or moderate, with no more than one instance of severe nausea or vomiting in any dose group and no instances of severe diarrhea. Treatment discontinuation rates for VESPER-3's weekly and monthly phases both show a compelling profile. Across the dose regimens planned for inclusion in phase III, five participants discontinued due to adverse events in each of the weekly and monthly phases. There were no discontinuations due to adverse events in the placebo group. We're encouraged by these results as they serve as an important proof of concept for the delivery of our fourfold equivalent monthly dose that maintains competitive tolerability, particularly given the study protocol did not permit down titration.

The totality of tolerability data support our plans to evaluate a higher monthly dose of 9.6 mg in phase III, which is the monthly equivalent to the 2.4 mg weekly dose currently being studied in the ongoing VESPER-4 trial. Today's encouraging results bolster our expansive obesity program. This year, we plan to advance 20+ obesity trials, including 10 phase III studies of 3944, that span chronic weight management, obesity-associated comorbidities, and opportunities to increase patient optionality and access. We are targeting the first of a series of potential approvals in 2028. Looking to our early-stage programs, we are enthusiastic about phase II studies with our ultra-long-acting amylin analog, which we believe has the potential for class-leading efficacy and combinability with 3944 in a monthly dosing format....

We previously reported positive early data from the single ascending dose combination study, which showed well-tolerated starting doses and additive weight loss. We plan to show updated combination data later this year. We continue to advance our potentially first-in-class oral GLP-1 agonist that is in phase II, and additional phase I studies of agents with diverse modalities and mechanisms. These include an injectable ultra-long-acting GLP-1 agonist, a potential quarterly dose injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist, and oral candidates. To summarize, today's results are clear. VESPER-3 achieved its two main objectives, reinforcing 3944's potential potent and tolerable monthly profile. The ultra-long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonist serves as a foundation to our differentiated investigational obesity portfolio, delivering robust weight loss with no plateau observed at week 28 in VESPER-3, while also maintaining competitive tolerability when switching to a full dose equivalent monthly dose.

We are primed to execute across an expansive phase III program of 3944, targeting potential approval starting in 2028, and we are pursuing differentiated combination approaches with earlier stage agents that have the potential to deliver greater optionality to address the diverse unmet needs of patients. With that, I'll turn it back to Albert.

Oh, thank you, Chris. And, I just wanted to say that today, results provide a compelling validation of our unique proprietary ultra long-acting peptide platform. For the first time, we have shown that the GLP-1 receptor agonist peptides can be administered monthly while maintaining the potential for competitive efficacy and safety. We are pleased with this important milestone for the platform that reinforces both the differentiation of our technology and the significant long-term value creation opportunity that represents. And with that, now I will turn it over to Dave, that he will discuss the excellent results of the quarter. So, Dave?

Great. Thank you, Chris and Albert, and good morning, everyone. Let me begin today by highlighting that our strong financial performance for both the fourth quarter and the full year directly reflects our continued disciplined execution of our key strategic priorities. We resolved certain and significant uncertainties in our business and made strategic investments aimed at driving revenue growth later this decade and beyond. Looking ahead, Pfizer's approaching an exciting phase, where recently launched and acquired products and a strong pipeline are anticipated to spur growth towards the end of this decade. With that said, this morning I'll provide our full year and fourth quarter 2025 results. Then I'll touch on our cost improvement initiatives, as well as our capital allocation priorities. I'll finish with a few comments on our 2026 guidance, which we are reaffirming today.

For the full year 2025, we recorded revenues of $62.6 billion versus $63.6 billion last year, representing a 2% operational decline. Importantly, our operational revenue growth when excluding contributions from our COVID-19 products was 6%. Full year 2025 adjusted gross margins expanded to 76%, in line with our expectations. We will continue to drive cost improvements going forward across our manufacturing network. And on the bottom line, we reported full year 2025 diluted EPS of $1.36 versus $1.41 last year, and adjusted diluted earnings per share of $3.22 versus $3.11 LY, ahead of expectations.

Pfizer's recently launched and acquired set of products delivered $10.2 billion in revenues for the full year of 2025, while growing approximately 14% operationally versus last year. We plan to continue to invest behind these two product groups to drive their future performance to enable the company to partially offset our LOEs over the next several years. Now, turning to the fourth quarter of 2025, we recorded revenues of $17.6 billion, a decrease of 3% operationally versus the same period of LY, largely driven by an approximate 40% operational year-over-year decline in our COVID products. The decline was primarily due to COMIRNATY receiving a narrow recommendation for vaccines in the U.S., and PAXLOVID, which experienced reduced demand from lower infection rates. Having said that, our non-COVID product performance was solid, growing 9% operationally versus the same period of last year.

Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of a refined commercial strategy. We saw solid contributions across our product portfolio, primarily driven by ABRYSVO, ELIQUIS, PREVNAR, and the VYNDAQEL family. Adjusted gross margin for the fourth quarter was approximately 71%, primarily reflecting the product mix in the quarter, including lower COMIRNATY sales versus fourth quarter of 2024, as well as continued strong cost management. Future improvements in our manufacturing footprint remain a top priority going forward. As a reminder, over the past two years, our adjusted gross margins have generally remained in the mid- to upper 70s%, excluding COMIRNATY, which has a 50/50 profit split with our partner, BioNTech. We achieved approximately $600 million in savings from phase I of our manufacturing optimization program through 2025, with additional savings expected in 2026 and 2027....

Total adjusted operating expenses were $7.4 billion for the fourth quarter of 2025, in line with last year. But looking at the components, adjusted SI expenses decreased 5% operationally, primarily driven by focused investments and ongoing productivity improvements that drove a decrease in marketing and promotional spend for various products and lower spending in corporate enabling functions. Adjusted R&D expense increased 4% operationally, primarily driven by an increase in spending in oncology and obesity product candidates, partially offset by a net decrease in spending due to pipeline focus and optimization, including the expansion of our digital capabilities. Now, turning to the bottom line, in the fourth quarter, our reported diluted GAAP performance was a loss per share of $0.29.

Our adjusted diluted earnings per share performance was a profit of $0.66, ahead of our expectations, due to our overall gross margin and cost management performance. In support of our goal to enhance R&D productivity and focus on high-impact medicines, our fourth quarter GAAP results reflect strategic decisions in our development plans and updated long-range revenue forecasts for certain products and pipeline assets. As a result, we recorded approximately $4.4 billion of non-cash and tangible asset impairments related to several medicines in development, as well as in-line products. It is important to note that one of the asset indications we deprioritized was disitamab vedotin in bladder cancer, is largely the result of the recent strong study readouts, expanded indications, and related higher long-term revenue projections for PADCEV.

PADCEV is an asset we will continue to invest behind and thus diminishing the value of DV in bladder cancer. I will also mention, while impairment decisions are based on current valuations of individual assets, overall, the Seagen portfolio is progressing ahead of our expectations. These decisions highlight our focus on delivering future growth as well as innovation. We are on track to deliver the majority of the anticipated $7.2 billion in total net cost savings from our productivity programs by the end of 2026. We expect additional savings of $700 million in 2026 and $200 million in 2027 from phase I of the manufacturing optimization program, for a total of $1.5 billion in savings by the end of 2027.

In addition, we exceeded our savings targets through 2025 from our cost realignment program, and as previously communicated, the R&D savings achieved in 2025 under the cost realignment program is expected to be reinvested in 2026 and is reflected in our 2026 R&D guidance range. We remain committed to achieving the expected $5.7 billion of total net savings from our cost realignment program by the end of 2026, at which time we will have met our savings commitment under the program. Going forward, we will continue to focus on identifying further productivity opportunities and efficiencies. Now, let me quickly touch upon our capital allocation strategy, which is designed to enhance long-term shareholder value.

Our strategy consists of maintaining and over the long term, growing our dividend, reinvesting in our business at the appropriate level of financial return, and in the future, the potential to make value-enhancing share repurchases. In 2025, we returned $9.8 billion to shareholders via the quarterly dividend, invested $10.4 billion in internal R&D, and invested approximately $8.8 billion in business development transactions, primarily reflecting the Metsera acquisition and the 3SBio licensing deal. And as a reminder, our leverage is expected to end 2025 at near our 2.7x target, following the close of the Metsera transaction. However, given the next few years of LOE headwinds, we expect the leverage to remain at this current level or slightly higher through the LOE period.

Additionally, the planned sale of our stake in ViiV will further improve our balance sheet. When including the ViiV proceeds, we have approximately $7 billion in BD capacity. Now, let me turn quickly to our full year 2026 guidance again, which remains unchanged. We expect total company full year 2026 revenues to be in the range of $59.5 billion-$62.5 billion, and full year 2026 adjusted diluted earnings per share to be in the range of $2.80-$3.00 a share, which reflects our expectations of strong contributions across our product portfolio. Mid-70s adjusted gross margin, continued focus on strong cost management, all while prioritizing investments in our business to drive growth by the end of this decade. Our COVID products are expected to trend lower again in 2026, with revenues of approximately $5 billion.

We continue to expect stable revenue contributions from our non-COVID product portfolio, which incorporates an expectation of approximately $1.5 billion in revenue compression due to products impacted by anticipated generic entry in 2026. Revenues at the midpoint, excluding COVID and LOE, LOE products, are expected to grow approximately 4% operationally year-over-year. And lastly, I will mention that we will continue to monitor currency fluctuation as the year progresses. In closing, let me continue to emphasize that over the next few, next few years, our focus is on investing in key assets and managing upcoming LOEs, mainly from 2026 through 2028. At the end of the decade, growth is expected to be driven by our advancing R&D pipeline, the business development initiatives we've already executed, and the ongoing progress of products we've recently launched or acquired.

... Our goal is to invest strategically, balancing cost savings with funding high-value products designed to ensure long-term and sustainable growth potential for our shareholders. With that, I'll turn it back to Albert and begin the Q&A.

Thank you, David. Congratulations for an excellent quarter. Now, operator, please assemble the queue.

Thank you. If you'd like to ask a question, press star one on your keypad. To leave the queue at any time, press star two. Once again, that is star one to ask a question. Our first question will come from Chris Schott with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks so much for the question. Just had maybe a two-parter on the VESPER-3 data. I guess first, can you just elaborate any more on the tolerability you saw here, and maybe just specifically, is there anything more you can say about vomit rates or any differences you saw between the mild or moderate dosing arms? And then just maybe bigger picture, if we consider the two doses that are moving forward from VESPER-3, it seems like you have a drug that clearly has solid weight loss. It's got monthly dosing. At the same time, that weight loss might be a bit below what you saw with the weekly or Zepbound. I just wonder your views on what role you see that type of profile playing in the market. Thanks so much.

Excellent, and of course, I will start with Chris, which I suspect will be the one who will receive most of the questions today, and I love it. So... and then maybe we'll ask also the commercial guys to speak a little bit about it. So why, Chris, why don't you start?

Yeah, thanks for the question. So obviously, we will share the full tolerability data at our oral presentation at ADA in June. We are really encouraged by the observed distribution of AEs across weekly and monthly. And, you could have expected potentially that when patients switch to a four-fold higher dose, we're gonna have a higher number of sudden discontinuation, and nausea and vomiting. We did not. Nice, the distribution between the monthly as well as the weekly. Just to remember for this study, there was no step-down titration was allowed, which is unusual for obesity trials, but that will obviously not happen in the phase III study. We will allow down titration. Regarding the different doses, as we pointed out, low and medium was presented today.

The higher dose is already being tested in phase III, because previous prediction models indicated that it will be well-tolerated, and we should test 2.4 mg weekly, which is happening now, and in the monthly study, we'll test 9.6, as pointed out.

All right. Why don't we go, Aamir, how do you see this playing commercial?

I think when you look at the clinical data, I think what it suggests to us very clearly is that 3944, from an efficacy perspective, has the potential to deliver efficacy that's competitive with the standard of care and potentially best in class against mono. So we think when you take that efficacy, and then you combine it with a lower medication burden through a monthly dose, that's a value proposition that's gonna resonate with patients, with providers, and with payers, because persistency and simplicity matter. And it also gives us the opportunity to switch patients from weekly onto monthly therapy. So we think 3944 is going to be a compelling therapy, full stop.

And then you add to that the opportunity that exists from the other assets that we have in our portfolio with our commercial capabilities to execute in the U.S. and international, and I think gives us a lot of confidence around the commercial potential.

Yeah. Thank you. I mean, the surprise, I think, so far with this market, it is how well it is performing outside the U.S. So Alexandre, what's your take?

That's right, yes. What's really interesting in this category is actually the size of the market, ex-U.S., are projected to be $150 billion, and 40% of that is actually ex-U.S. There are two things that are really interesting in this category that are unique and that reinforce the potential of this asset. First is the out-of-pocket category, because in most country, when we introduce the innovation, we have to go through reimbursement negotiation and often translating to price reduction. In this category, we see that there are high willingness to pay out of pocket across all mature market, whether it be in Europe or in Australia or in Canada, and we see the price point being across $250-$350, which is higher than what we had expected.

When we look at the latest release from our competitors in this category, we see that there is highest willingness to pay from all those geographies, including actually also emerging markets, where we also see high prevalence. The second thing is the time to market, because it's gonna be mostly an out-of-pocket category. The time after approval at the EMA will be incentivized, where we will be able to actually commercialize those products, so that will drive also rapid penetration in the market.

Thank you, Alexandre. Next question, please.

Our next question comes from Vamil Divan with Guggenheim Securities. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks for taking the question. So just maybe building off this, Chris, you just talked a little bit about this in a prior question around down titration in phase III. Can you just elaborate a little bit more on that, on how you're designing your phase IIIs and allowing for flexibility of patient maybe dealing with any sort of side effects, and maybe that improves overall the efficacy from phase II? And then my other question is actually just beyond VESPER-3. You mentioned this will be at ADA. I'm curious what other data we may get from either your internal programs or from the Metsera portfolio at ADA, and specifically your internal GIP, do you expect to provide that phase II data there? Thank you.

Thank you very much for the question. Just a reminder again, for the VESPER-3 data we presented today, there's only two step-up doses. You use to four, five step-up doses to get to the, the desired dose. In this study, it was only two step-up doses. So the phase III design for VESPER-6 will test different titrations as well as, as we pointed out, the additional dose of 9.6 mg, which is currently being tested in VESPER-4 as 2.4 mg weekly. Regarding the rest of the portfolio, we're obviously excited about the platform in general, it's a very differentiated platform.

As you know, we previously presented data for the ultra long-acting amylin, 3945, also called MET-233, where the observed additive weight loss when combining 3944 and 3945 was 5% at day eight, and single agent ultra long-acting amylin previous data showed at day 36, 8.4% placebo-adjusted weight loss. So we should share later this year, including at ADA, updated data on the amylin and potential early data for the combination of the amylin plus 3944. We also, as you know, in our portfolio, excited about the rest of the phase II programs, which including a potential first-in-class GLP antagonist oral that was discovered, conceptualized internally.

That's current in the randomized phase II experience, and also the more broader phase I program of peptides, including an ultra-long GLP-1 that's potentially three monthly, quarterly, that's currently in phase I, as well as our additional oral portfolio, including the oral GLP-1 recently acquired from Yao Pharma.

Our next question comes from Steve Scala with TD Cowen. Please go ahead.

Thank you so much. In the VESPER-3 data, did the placebo arm gain weight or lose weight? And the second question is not on obesity, but Pfizer has been quite adamant about no life beyond December 2028 for VYNDAQEL. Should we completely rule out any sort of strategy whatsoever, such as settlement with generic companies on patents Pfizer holds?

Thank you, Steve. Let me take the VYNDAQEL, because I have been asked multiple times. Right now, we are assuming that the patent will be lost at the end of 2028. And, I don't have any other comments to make on that. You know, these are very sensitive topics. So I'm moving to Chris now to talk about the placebo arm-

... and about what was the weight loss there.

Again, the full data will be presented at ADA, but in this case, VESPER-3, actually, the placebo arm was very stable, not really up or down, but you'll see the data at ADA.

All right. Thank you very much. The next question, please.

Our next question comes from Geoff Meacham with Citibank. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys, morning, and congrats on the data today. Again, a few on the new data today. So when you look at the PK/PD, are you guys set with monthly being the longest dosing interval to preserve efficacy? Or is it potentially feasible to extend to, you know, every two-month dosing? And then on your phase III plans, you know, is it your sense these are likely to be the standard type of metabolic studies that we'd expect to do, or would you pursue any maybe inflammation or neuropsych indications, or would you pursue GLP-1 active comparator studies? I'm trying to think of how you could separate yourself in a broad phase III program. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Geoff. So Chris, monthly or more, and then additional studies?

So thank you for the question. So 3944 is, as we demonstrated, the first peptide that can be administered monthly. And potentially, yes, we can go longer, but for 3944, our aim is as a monthly maintenance therapy. As I mentioned, we do have another molecule, a peptide currently in phase I, which has a prodrug, a propeptide, with a potential for three-monthly administration. That's currently in phase I, and we should, in the next couple of months, get additional PK/PD data from that molecule, which will be our a potential opportunity to go to three-monthly. The second question, the initial phase III programs, VESPER-4, VESPER-5, and VESPER-6. VESPER-4 is the one in patients without type 2 diabetes.

That's currently ongoing with weekly testing, including the high dose of 2.4 mg weekly. VESPER 5 in patients with type 2 diabetes, and VESPER 6, the study that will include monthly dosing. Beyond that, we plan to start seven studies. We haven't showed or revealed what these studies are gonna be, but you're absolutely correct that beyond cardiovascular and metabolic, we are looking at other opportunities to differentiate and also to differentiate with our combinations, for instance, with amylin or with the GLP currently in phase I.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Terence Flynn with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks for taking the questions. Maybe two also for me on the VESPER-3 data. I know you want to hold a lot of the data till ADA, but just was wondering if you can provide any high-level details on the baseline characteristics, so either BMI or gender mix. I know sometimes those can vary across studies. And then on the tolerability side, again, one question when you have, you know, longer dosing intervals, is the duration of GI side effects. And so any qualitative commentary there, if that's longer than, you know, one or two days? Thank you.

... Thank you. Chris, again, that goes to you.

Okay, just to start with the demographics. The study was conducted in the U.S. only, and I think, as you know, there are differences, especially in AE and tolerability, the discontinuations between U.S.-only patient populations. So that's one. The rest of the detailed demographics will be presented at ADA, but it's as expected from a small U.S.-based phase II study. The next question was?

Tolerability. As we stated before, we are encouraged by the overall tolerability. It is similar to what you expect for a GLP-1 class, but specifically, we can move to monthly with a distribution of AEs across weekly and monthly. That didn't give us alarm that switching to monthly, suddenly there's a cluster of discontinuations or significant AEs. As I pointed out earlier as well, there's only one severe nausea, one severe vomiting across the whole program, no severe diarrhea. So overall, we're very encouraged by the safety profile, and again, I'll share the whole AE profile.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Akash Tewari with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks so much. The data, data in second-line plus mCLCs has been pretty underwhelming so far versus docetaxel. Is your team confident that you can deliver a superior profile with your upcoming phase III with B6A, or are you gonna need to enrich in B6A high-expressing patients? Can you help frame expectations for this readout?

So you're referring to sigvotatug vedotin, yes?

Great. Okay, so this is a second-line study, I should point out, against docetaxel. The phase III study, there's also additional phase III study ongoing, just a reminder, which is first-line, which is sigvotatug vedotin plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab in the TPS high, PD-L1 high population. In the single-agent activity we've seen, the response rate was over 30%, with a median overall survival in the phase II study, which approached 16.3 months. So overall, we're encouraged by the data. With the combination study with SV plus pembrolizumab, we saw overall response rate of 57%, with disease control rate of over 90%. So we are confident in the two studies.

I agree with you that the second-line study against docetaxel, none of the other ADCs have really showed a benefit over docetaxel, but everything we've seen so far, so, you know, gives us confidence in the trial. That will be the first study to read out, and the second study to read out will be the one with pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab. It's an event-driven study. Events are slower than we expected, so that could mean either arm are performing better, but we should update you on the study results in the coming months, first half of this year.

Excellent, Chris. So then the next question, please.

Thank you. We'll go next to Asad Haider with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Great, and thanks for all the detail on the clinical catalysts. So maybe just one on portfolio realignment. Albert, with respect to just this recent divestment of your stake in the HIV joint venture with Glaxo, just broadly, what innings are we in, in terms of just portfolio pruning or realignment, noting that you've also recently announced a new reorganization incorporating your global hospital and biosimilar business? Thanks.

I think Chris can also comment on that, but let me, given that you addressed the question to me. I think we have done most of our, the pruning of our pipeline right now. So the things that, we are continuing right now, at large, are things that we believe, they are the ones to invest, and we keep investing. Very, very few exceptions of things that they were already there, and we had some issues to discontinue or to, divest. So I think from that aspect, I think we are doing very well. Chris, anything to add there?

Yeah, we're focusing just on the four therapeutic areas, and we, during 2025, significant prioritization and focus the program, and as you know, identified up to $500 million savings in R&D, which is now reinvested in phase III programs. And this year, as Albert pointed out, we plan to start approximately 20 phase III programs, driving the portfolio.

Maybe Dave also can add a little bit color on that. But I just wanted to say that when you speak about realigning, creating synergies or creating cost savings in R&D that we reinvest, we don't mean going forward with discontinuation of programs, but actually with increase of programs. It's going to be by deploying AI, which already happened in 2025 with excellent results. That creates significant productivity gains. This is where we are reducing the cost of R&D, and we all are invested to more programs that, as you see, we are starting 20 pivotal studies in 2026. Dave?

Yeah, I just would just add on to that. As we look at our in-line portfolio products, we always continue to look to see how we can maximize the value. ViiV is just a good example of a non-strategic asset for us, monetizing that in such a way that we can redeploy that capital at higher returns in the future. As you pointed out, we did create a sterile, injectable, and biosimilar set of products, of which we're focused on driving productivity across that set of product portfolio, and we will continue to do that as we think about our product portfolio going forward.

Thank you very much, Dave. Next question, please.

... Thank you. Our next question comes from Courtney Breen with Bernstein. Please go ahead.

Thanks so much for the question today. Just perhaps building on the conversation that was just taking place, as you talk about the 20+ pivotal studies that are starting this year, we're seeing kind of a midpoint $11 billion guide for R&D in 2026. How do we think about 2027 as these studies start to annualize? And then kind of combining that with the element that you just raised, Albert, of the AI investment, the 1,200 GPU deployment that you're making, kind of, when and where will we begin to see impact from that strategy? And will that impact anything in the operations of R&D of the pivotal trials, or should we be thinking more about innovation on the research side of the dogma? Thank you so much.

Pfizer (PFE) Q4 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Company Participants