Credit Update: New drugs ease Pfizer’s patent cliff, though leverage is expected to remain elevated

Pfizer’s fast-growing new drugs will only partly replace revenue lost to the 2027-2028 patent expiries, keeping leverage above 3x. Still, with interest coverage of 5.0x, ample liquidity and improving cash generation, we maintain our decent view of the credit profile.

Author Pic
Published on 22 Oct 2026
Featured Image

We initiated coverage on Pfizer's USD bonds earlier this year, based on its results for FY25 (ending 31 December 2025). Pfizer has since reported its 1Q26 and 2Q26 results, covering the six months ending 28 June 2026 (1H26). In this article, we review the group's performance, update our credit metrics on a trailing twelve-month (TTM) basis and revisit our view on the bonds.

Related articles:

Idea of the Week: Pfizer– bridging the USD$17b patent cliff with oncology and operational discipline

1) A resilient top line and cash flow improved, while one-off items drove the fall in profit

Pfizer’s sales held up well in 1H26. Revenue rose 3.9% year on year (YoY) to US$29.5b (1H25: US$28.4b), with more than half of the increase from currency movements. Excluding currency effects and COVID products, whose sales fell to US$0.7b (1H25: US$1.9b), revenue grew 6%.
Profit, however, fell sharply. Pre-tax income dropped 56.8% YoY to US$2.5b (1H25: US$5.8b), mainly because Pfizer wrote down the value of two drugs by US$4.3b (see Section 2 below). Such write-downs are accounting charges, so no cash leaves the company. They more than offset a US$1.9b gain from selling Pfizer’s 11.7% stake in ViiV Healthcare, an HIV drugmaker.

We also track EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation), a common measure of operating earnings. Reported EBITDA fell 31.7% YoY to US$7.1b (1H25: US$10.4b), but about two-thirds of the decline came from the one-offs. Excluding them, EBITDA fell a milder 10.8% to US$9.5b (1H25: US$10.7b), as costs rose faster than sales. Cost of sales, mainly the cost of making its drugs, rose 15.3% YoY. Research and development (R&D) spending rose 13.1% as Pfizer invested in cancer and obesity drugs, and legal charges rose to US$1.0b (1H25: US$564.0m). As sales held up, we think Pfizer’s core business remains stable heading into its patent cliff (see Section 2). However, higher costs cut its EBITDA margin excluding one-offs to 32.4% of revenue (1H25: 37.7%).

For bondholders, cash flow matters more than accounting profit, as cash is what services debt. Here, 1H26 was much stronger. Operating cash flow (OCF), the cash generated by day-to-day business, nearly doubled to US$3.5b (1H25: US$1.8b). Free cash flow (FCF), the cash left after investment in factories and equipment, rose to US$2.5b (1H25: US$571.0m). Pfizer attributes part of the increase to the timing of payments and receipts, which may reverse. Even so, FCF understates Pfizer’s cash generation, as it absorbed the final instalment, of about US$2.6b, of a one-off US tax on past overseas earnings. Excluding this, FCF would have been about US$5.1b.

Looking ahead, management raised its FY26 revenue guidance to US$60.5b-62.5b (previously US$59.5b-62.5b) on its results call for the second quarter of 2026. It did so even as it cut its FY26 COVID revenue estimate to about US$4.0b. It also expanded its cost-cutting programmes, targeting about US$9.7b of net savings through 2029 (previously US$7.2b), at a further one-time cost of about US$6.0b, over half of it in cash. We expect the extra savings, which start in 2027, to cushion margins during the patent cliff and support debt servicing, although higher R&D spending will absorb part of the benefit.

2) The patent cliff has narrowed, but sales losses in 2027-2028 will keep leverage elevated

Pfizer’s main challenge is its patent cliff. When a drug’s patent expires, cheaper generic copies can enter the market, and the original drug typically loses 80-90% of its sales within a year. Several of Pfizer’s best-selling drugs lose US patent protection before 2030 (see Table 1 below).

The good news is that the cliff has narrowed. Pfizer has settled most of the patent lawsuit challenges over Vyndaqel/Vyndamax, its second-largest drug franchise (1H26 sales: US$3.4b), which treats a rare heart disease. Under the settlements, generics can launch in the US only from 1 June 2031, about 2.5 years later than management had assumed. Management therefore cut its estimate of annual revenue at risk from patent expiries by 2030 to US$14.0b-15.0b (previously US$17.0b) on the 1Q26 call. One challenger, Apotex, has not settled, and its case is ongoing.

However, 2027-2028 remains the pressure point. Ibrance (breast cancer) and Xtandi (prostate cancer) lose US patent protection in 2027, and Eliquis (a blood thinner and Pfizer’s top-selling drug) in 2028. Together, these three drugs made up 25.9% of 1H26 revenue. Their US sales also face lower prices set by the government for Medicare, which insures older Americans. We therefore expect a meaningful fall in earnings over 2027-2028, which should keep leverage in the mid-3x range.

To replace these sales, Pfizer is relying on newer drugs it has launched or acquired. These brought in US$6.3b of revenue in 1H26, with sales growing 22% YoY in 1Q26 and 18% in 2Q26, excluding currency effects. For example, sales of Padcev, a bladder cancer drug from Pfizer’s US$43.0b purchase of Seagen in 2023, rose 30.1% YoY in 1H26.

That said, not every new drug will succeed. In 1H26, Pfizer wrote down US$3.8b on a Seagen lung cancer drug that failed a final-stage trial, and US$525.0m on Oxbryta, a sickle cell drug withdrawn in 2024. These non-cash charges signal lower future earnings from acquired drugs and weaken the cancer pipeline we highlighted at initiation, although Seagen’s sales have so far beaten management’s expectations.

Encouragingly for bondholders, Pfizer has shifted from large acquisitions to smaller deals. Since buying obesity drug developer Metsera for US$8.0b in November 2025, it has agreed to pay US$650.0m upfront to partner with China’s Innovent Biologics on 12 early-stage cancer drugs. On the 2Q26 call, management put its remaining deal budget at about US$6.0b and signalled that further deals would be small add-ons. We therefore see limited risk of a large debt-funded acquisition, although milestone payments on these deals could weigh on cash flow.

Looking ahead, we think the new drugs will replace much, but not all, of the sales at risk, and only partly in time. On the 1Q26 call, management said they were on track for more than US$12.0b of sales in 2026, against US$14.0b-15.0b of annual revenue at risk. Management itself expects revenue to return to growth only from 2029. Key events to watch include a late-stage prostate cancer trial result due in 4Q26, progress on Metsera’s obesity drug, which targets first approval in 2028, and the Apotex case. Setbacks would delay the recovery after 2028 that underpins our credit view.

Table 1: Non-COVID drugs more than offset lower COVID sales, but drugs losing US patents in 2027-2028 are still a quarter of sales


Drug Name

1H26 (US$m)

1H25 (US$m)

YoY

US patent expiry

Eliquis

4,591

3,926

+16.9%

2028

Vyndaqel/Vyndamax (Growth*)

3,364

3,101

+8.5%

June 2031*

Prevnar family

3,027

3,043

-0.5%

2035

Ibrance

2,066

2,026

+2.0%

2027

Padcev (growth*)

1,258

967

+30.1%

2036

Xtandi

978

1,023

-4.4%

2027

Nurtec ODT/Vydura (Growth*)

774

607

+27.5%

2034

Lorbrena (Growth*)

659

473

+39.3%

2033

Comirnaty (COVID)

493

945

-47.8%

2041

Paxlovid (COVID)

207

918

-77.5%

2041

Total revenue

29,484

28,367

+3.9%

NA

*Growth products refer to drugs with US patents running past 2030 that grew in 1H26.

Data as of 28 June 2026

Source: Company Data, iFAST Compilations.


3) Ample liquidity supported by increased cash generation

In the meantime, Pfizer has ample liquidity, or cash and committed funding it can draw on. As of 28 June 2026, it held cash and short-term investments of US$11.7b (FY25: US$13.6b) and US$7.2b of unused credit lines, mainly a US$7.0b bank facility available until October 2030. This US$18.9b of liquidity is more than five times the US$3.3b of debt and deal payments due within twelve months. These comprise US$2.7b of short-term borrowings and the US$650.0m Innovent payment, made in July. We therefore see little near-term risk of Pfizer struggling to repay its debt.

Stronger cash generation helped Pfizer repay US$1.3b of long-term debt and pay US$4.9b of dividends in 1H26. These outflows still exceeded its US$2.5b of FCF and US$1.9b of ViiV sale proceeds, so cash and short-term investments fell. Positively for bondholders, total debt fell to US$63.2b (FY25: US$64.8b) in the absence of new debt issuances.

Looking ahead, FY27 cash flow should benefit from the end of the US tax instalments, just as the 2027 patent expiries start to weigh. We therefore expect Pfizer’s liquidity to remain stable, although large acquisitions, a higher dividend or renewed share buybacks could weaken it.

4) Non-cash write-downs lifted leverage to 3.8x, while coverage remains comfortable

While liquidity is ample, Pfizer’s debt has risen relative to its earnings. We track two measures over TTM to 28 June 2026 (see Table 2 below). Leverage, or net debt (debt minus cash and short-term investments) divided by EBITDA, shows roughly how many years of earnings would repay net debt, so lower is better. Interest coverage, or EBITDA divided by interest expense, shows how many times earnings cover interest costs, so higher is better.

Leverage rose to 3.8x (FY25: 3.1x). Net debt was broadly flat at US$51.5b (FY25: US$51.2b), but TTM EBITDA fell to US$13.5b (FY25: US$16.8b), largely because of the one-offs. Excluding them, leverage would have been 3.2x, so the rise reflects accounting charges rather than more borrowing. Our debt figure excludes milestone payments of up to US$2.3b for Metsera and US$9.85b for Innovent, which are due only if the drugs hit trial, approval or sales targets. Paying the Metsera milestones in full from cash would lift leverage to about 4.0x, or 3.4x excluding one-offs, by our estimates.

Interest coverage fell to 5.0x (FY25: 6.3x), or 5.9x excluding one-offs. With earnings still covering interest costs five times over, we think Pfizer remains well placed to service its debt. As the one-offs drop out of the TTM figures by mid-2027, we expect coverage to recover partly, although the 2027-2028 patent expiries should keep it below FY25’s 6.3x.

Looking ahead, barring further write-downs, we expect leverage to ease towards 3.2x as the one-offs drop out by mid-2027, before the 2027-2028 patent expiries push it back up. With net debt unchanged, a 10% fall in EBITDA would lift leverage to about 3.6x. Cost savings and newer drugs should limit the fall in earnings, keeping leverage in the mid-3x range. We would revisit our view if it rises above this range.

Table 2: Write-downs lifted leverage to 3.8x and cut coverage to 5.0x

Credit metric

FY23

FY24

FY25

1H26 (TTM)

Net debt / TTM EBITDA

6.2x

2.4x

3.1x

3.8x (excl.one-offs: 3.2x)

Interest coverage (TTM EBITDA / interest expense)

4.3x

5.9x

6.3x

5.0x (excl.one-offs: 5.9x)

Data as of 28 June 2026.

Source: Company Data, iFAST Compilations.


Recommendations

In sum, we maintain our view that Pfizer’s credit profile is decent. The Vyndamax settlements have narrowed the patent cliff, and newer drugs should replace much, though not all, of the sales at risk. Despite the Seagen setback, stronger cash generation, ample liquidity and smaller deals should keep the credit profile stable, albeit with leverage in the mid-3x range.

As of 19 October 2026, Pfizer’s 2033 and 2053 bonds yield the most among the global drugmakers in Table 3 below. However, they yield only 1-3 basis points (bps) more than bonds from Bristol Myers Squibb, which has the same credit ratings. We therefore view Pfizer’s bonds as fairly priced, and they even yield slightly more than AbbVie’s, which S&P rates one step lower (A-). Against US government bonds (Treasuries) of similar maturity, they pay extra yield, or a spread, of more than 50 bps for the 2033 bond and 80 bps for the 2053 bond. Investors can consider the 2033 bond as an alternative to comparable government bonds, given Pfizer’s solid credit ratings (A from S&P and A2 from Moody’s).

The 2053 bond, which yields 6.25% (2033 bond: 5.52%), is available on Bondsupermart live in small lots, from a minimum of US$1,000 in increments of US$1,000. It suits investors comfortable holding a long-dated bond. However, long-dated bonds fall more in price when interest rates rise, a risk that Pfizer’s credit strength cannot offset.

Table 3: About Pfizer’s bonds 


Issue

Issuer

Ask price

Yield to worst (%)

Years to maturity

Credit rating (S&P / Fitch / Moody's)

PFE 4.750% 19May2033 Corp (USD)

Pfizer Investment Enterprises Pte Ltd

95.77

5.53%

6.58

A / - / A2

PFE 5.300% 19May2053 Corp (USD)

Pfizer Investment Enterprises Pte Ltd

88.14

6.22%

26.60

A / - / A2

MRK 4.500% 17May2033 Corp (USD)

Merck & Co Inc

95.14

5.39%

 6.57

A+ / - / Aa3

MRK 5.000% 17May2053 Corp (USD)

Merck & Co Inc

84.98

6.16%

26.57

A+ / - / Aa3

BMY 5.900% 15Nov2033 Corp (USD)

Bristol Myers Squibb

102.14

5.52%

7.06

A / - / A2

BMY 6.250% 15Nov2053 Corp (USD)

Bristol Myers Squibb

100.34

6.22%

27.06

A / - / A2

ABBV 4.400% 15Mar2033 Corp (USD)

Abbvie Inc

93.98

5.53%

6.40

A- / - / A2

ABBV 5.400% 15Mar2054 Corp (USD)

Abbvie Inc

89.88

6.17%

27.40

A- / - / A2

LLY 4.700% 27Feb2033 Corp (USD)

Eli Lilly & Co

96.64

5.33%

6.35

AA- / - / Aa3

LLY 4.875% 27Feb2053 Corp (USD)

Eli Lilly & Co

84.38

6.07%

26.35

AA- / - / Aa3

Data as of 22 October 2026.

Source: Bondsupermart, Bloomberg, iFAST Compilations.



Declaration: For specific disclosure, at the time of publication of this report, IFPL (via its connected and associated entities) holds a position in PFE 5.300% 19May2053 Corp (USD), and the analyst who produced this report holds NIL positions in the abovementioned securities. This research report was prepared with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) tools. iFAST Financial Pte Ltd does not rely exclusively on AI for content generation; the content of this report – including all investment theses, ratings, price targets and conclusions – has been independently reviewed and verified by the research analyst(s) to ensure accuracy and professional integrity.


All Contents here in do not constitute financial advice or formal recommendation and must not be relied upon as such. Bondsupermart and its Information Providers are not giving or purporting to give or representing or holding ourselves out as giving personalised financial, investment, tax, legal and other professional advice. Please read our full Terms and Conditions section on the website

Facebook Comments