Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 22

←→Full screen

HEALTH CARE › PHARMACEUTICALS, BIOTECHNOLOGY AND LIFE SCIENCES › ANTIBODY AND PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS

Antibody and Protein Therapeutics: One Label, Three Tiers

Where enterprise value sits across the antibody and protein therapeutics set, what the two ends of the range have in common, and what recent acquirers agreed to pay for whole companies.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E)

Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 22 · HEALTH CARE › PHARMACEUTICALS, BIOTECHNOLOGY AND LIFE SCIENCES › ANTIBODY AND PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   HEALTH CARE › PHARMACEUTICALS, BIOTECHNOLOGY AND LIFE SCIENCES › ANTIBODY AND PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS

   Cover slide identifying the sector, industry classification and reporting date for this outlook.

   We're opening on Antibody and Protein Therapeutics, our sector read as of September 28, 2026. This deck sets up how the whole universe prices, and where the real spread sits.

   Everything on this page

   HEALTH CARE › PHARMACEUTICALS, BIOTECHNOLOGY AND LIFE SCIENCES › ANTIBODY AND PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS Antibody and Protein Therapeutics: One Label, Three Tiers Where enterprise value sits across the antibody and protein therapeutics set, what the two ends of the range have in common, and what recent acquirers agreed to pay for whole companies. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E) Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   Contents page listing the five numbered sections and the appendix that make up this report.

   The report runs five sections plus an appendix, and we've put the bottom line first on purpose. If a client only has time for section one, they still leave with the full story.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line One Sector Label, Three Different Price Tiers 02 The Landscape 60 of the 63 Names Are Clinical-Stage Developers 03 Valuation & Situations The Gap Between the Top and the Bottom of the Range Is the Finding 04 Precedent Transactions Acquirers Kept Buying Through the Repricing 05 Strategic Implications What a Management Team Can Actually Move 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Trades as Three Priced Tiers, Led by Clinical-Stage Biologics Developers

   Summary slide stating that the sector trades in three valuation tiers led by clinical-stage biologics developers.

   This is the whole argument on one page: the sector splits into three priced tiers, and the top tier trades at 17.6x CY2027E revenue against 1.2x at the bottom, with a 5.8x median in between. That is a wide gap between the top and bottom of the same industry label, not a rounding error. We built this on EV/Revenue for CY2027E consensus because that is the basis validated coverage supports across the group. So the question for any name in this room is which side of that gap it sits on, and why.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Trades as Three Priced Tiers, Led by Clinical-Stage Biologics Developers The full story on one page · figures on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (32 of 63 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (32 of 63 companies), so this report follows it. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Distance Between the Top and the Bottom Is a Strategy Question, Not a Rounding Error The middle of the set sits at 5.8x CY2027E revenue. The eight names at the top sit at 17.6x and the eight at the bottom at 1.2x, with a revenue lens used here alongside only 6 of the 63 companies carrying a meaningful forward EBITDA. 2 Growth Shows up in the Price, but It Does Not Split the Set Cleanly The 13 names growing above the covered middle growth rate sit at 6.7x; the 12 below it sit at 3.2x. The two groups overlap: 4 names hold a multiple above the middle of the set while their forecast revenue line runs below it. 3 Almost the Whole Set Is Clinical-Stage, and That Is Where the Range Lives 60 of the 63 companies are clinical-stage biologics developers, and the 29 of them carrying a CY2027E revenue estimate sit at 6.2x. The 3 adjacent-model names, which carry product revenue today, sit at 2.0x. 4 Buyers Have Stayed in the Market at Both Ends of the Range Across the 9 transactions shown, acquirers run from large-cap pharmaceutical buyers to mid-cap consolidators: AbbVie Inc. announced ImmunoGen, Inc. at 9.9x revenue, and Merck & Co., Inc. completed Harpoon Therapeutics, Inc. at $88M. Consideration in this sector is customarily unbundled across upfronts, milestones and contingent value rights. 5.8x Sector median EV/Revenue CY2027E consensus · EV/Revenue is the lens because practitioners price this growth set on revenue and 3 of 63 names are… 17.6x Premium end EV/Revenue vs 1.2x at the discount end top quartile (n=8) against bottom quartile (n=8) on EV/Revenue — the spread the report explains 16 Transactions with disclosed terms 53 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   Section divider introducing the market landscape and segment split.

   Next we break the universe into its business-segment groups and show where the price gap actually lives.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE 60 of the 63 Names Are Clinical-Stage Developers Two groups on the page, and the price gap between them. 02 of 06 Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   95% of the Names Sit in One Segment, and the Range Runs Top to Bottom Inside It

   Chart grouping all 63 companies by business segment with the median EV/Revenue multiple for each group.

   95% of the names in this sector sit in a single segment, and that segment alone spans the full range from top to bottom. That tells us the tiering is not a story about different business models — it's happening inside one group. So peer comparison has to happen within that segment, not against the sector label as a whole.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP 95% of the Names Sit in One Segment, and the Range Runs Top to Bottom Inside It 63 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 CLINICAL-STAGE BIOLOGICS DEVELOPERS 60 cos median 6.2x argenx SE (ARGX) Genmab A/S (GMAB) Roivant Sciences (ROIV) BioMarin (BMRN) ImmunityBio (IBRX) TG Therapeutics (TGTX) Immunovant (IMVT) Scholar Rock (SRRK) Kodiak Sciences (KOD) Oruka Therapeutics (ORKA) Dianthus (DNTH) Arcus Biosciences (RCUS) ADMA Biologics (ADMA) Xencor (XNCR) Celldex (CLDX) Viridian (VRDN) Inhibrx (INBX) Absci (ABSI) Omeros (OMER) Vir Biotechnology (VIR) Zenas BioPharma (ZBIO) Savara (SVRA) Corvus (CRVS) Bicara (BCAX) OmniAb (OABI) Annexon (ANNX) MoonLake (MLTX) Cullinan (CGEM) Shattuck Labs (STTK) +31 more Value here is a probability-weighted view of launch scenarios, so the forward revenue line captures only part of what a buyer underwrites. ADJACENT MODELS 3 cos median 2.0x Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) Kiniksa (KNSA) Kamada (KMDA) Three businesses with product revenue on the books today, priced off delivered economics rather than the next pivotal readout.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Clinical-Stage Developers Set the Sector's Range; The Product-Revenue Names Sit Below It

   Segment view showing clinical-stage developers set the sector's valuation range while product-revenue names sit below it.

   Clinical-stage developers set both the top and the bottom of this range; the handful of names already selling an approved product sit below both. That's a meaningful split for anyone benchmarking a clinical-stage asset — the product-revenue comparables aren't the right anchor. Full company-level detail sits in the appendix for any name a client wants to trace.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Clinical-Stage Developers Set the Sector's Range; The Product-Revenue Names Sit Below It Segment view of the approved universe · EV / Revenue (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/Revenue Names to know What they do — and why it matters Clinical-stage biologics developers 60 95% 6.2x argenx SE (ARGX) · Genmab A/S (GMAB) · +58 more Sixty names, one pricing spectrum. 60 of the 63 companies sit here, from FcRn and bispecific franchises to early linker-payload platforms. The 29 carrying a CY2027E revenue estimate sit at 6.2x, and the spread inside this one group runs from the top tier of the set to the bottom. Adjacent models 3 5% 2.0x Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) · Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (KNSA) · +1 more Three product-revenue businesses. Grifols, S.A. (GRFS), Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (KNSA) and Kamada Ltd. (KMDA) carry commercial revenue today, and the 3 names sit at 2.0x. Diligence on businesses like these turns on collection and manufacturing capacity, delivered gross margin and payer mix rather than a single readout.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   Section divider introducing the public market valuation analysis.

   Now we go inside the range itself — 32 of the 63 companies carry a CY2027E revenue estimate, and the gap between their top and bottom is the finding.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Gap Between the Top and the Bottom of the Range Is the Finding 63 companies on the page, of which 32 names carry a CY2027E revenue estimate. 03 of 06 Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   A Forward Lens Already Credits the Forecast — the Top of the Range Holds Its Premium Anyway

   Ranked chart of the 12 highest and 12 lowest of 32 rated companies on EV/Revenue for CY2027E, against a 5.8x sector median.

   Even on a forward lens that already credits the forecast, the top of the range holds its premium — these aren't names the market expects to fall back to the median. The sector median sits at 5.8x, with the top and bottom cohorts pulling well away from it in both directions. That persistence is the signal: something durable, not just a timing effect, separates these two groups. So the driver question is what the top group has that the bottom does not.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION A Forward Lens Already Credits the Forecast — the Top of the Range Holds Its Premium Anyway EV / Revenue (CY2027E) · the 12 highest and 12 lowest of 32 rated companies · sector median 5.8x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (32 of 63 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (32 of 63 companies), so this report follows it. The 8 mid-cohort names cluster near the median; the full set is in the appendix and companion tables. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / Revenue (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM END — the eight names at the top of the range, at 17.6x · median 17.6x DISCOUNT END — the eight names at the bottom of the range, at 1.2x · median 1.2x Sector median 5.8x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top is clinical-stage. The eight names at the top of the range are clinical-stage biologics developers, among them Vir Biotechnology, Inc. (VIR), Xencor, Inc. (XNCR) and OmniAb, Inc. (OABI). The premium sits alongside platform breadth, engineered-Fc and masked-antibody programmes and partner-funded work, rather than alongside delivered product revenue. The bottom carries product revenue. The bottom of the range includes Grifols, S.A. (GRFS), Kamada Ltd. (KMDA) and ADC Therapeutics S.A. (ADCT), businesses with revenue already on the books. A revenue multiple is a harder lens for a company selling product today than for one whose forecast line is still small. A forward lens already credits growth. CY2027E revenue embeds the consensus forecast, so a premium that survives that lens is a statement about durability rather than near-term pace. Clearing the middle of the range on a forward number is the harder of the two tests.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   Profitability Separates the Two Ends: Names Above the 32% Margin Line Carry 4.9x Against 2.0x Below It

   Comparison of median EV/Revenue by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort, each split at its covered median.

   Margin does more work than growth here: names above the 32% margin line carry a 4.9x median against 2.0x below it, a wider split than the growth cut shows. Growth still matters — faster-growing names trade higher — but margin is the sharper divider in this data. We read this as association in the data we have, not a causal claim. So margin trajectory is worth as much attention as the growth story when assessing where a name sits in this range.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Profitability Separates the Two Ends: Names Above the 32% Margin Line Carry 4.9x Against 2.0x Below It Median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=13; slower n=12; higher-margin n=3; lower-margin n=3). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/Revenue, median per cohort · growth split at 18% · EBITDA-margin split at 32% The Faster-Growing Names Sit Higher, and the Two Groups Still Overlap Across the 32 names with a CY2027E revenue estimate, the 13 growing above 18% sit at 6.7x and the 12 below sit at 3.2x. The gap is visible, and it is narrower than the distance between the top and bottom tiers of the same set. Four Names Hold a High Multiple with a Falling Forecast Line Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) at -40% and Xencor, Inc. (XNCR) at -13% sit above the middle multiple with forecast revenue declining. In this sector the reported revenue line often reflects collaboration and milestone income, so a falling line is not the same signal it would be in a product business. Five Names Grow Above the Middle and Still Price Below It Compugen Ltd. (CGEN), Whitehawk Therapeutics Inc (WHWK) and Invivyd, Inc. (IVVD) are among the 5 names with above-middle growth sitting below the middle multiple. Where forecast pace is credited and where it is not is a question a board can test against its own readout calendar and its owned-versus-partnered economics. Thin Profit Coverage Keeps This Set on a Revenue Lens 6 of the 63 companies carry a meaningful forward EBITDA, which leaves the revenue line doing most of the work in peer comparison. Diligence in this sector tests cash runway to the next value-inflecting readout alongside the forecast revenue line, and prices the patent estate and freedom to operate separately.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Eight Names Clear Both the Growth Bar and the Margin Bar; Nine Clear Only One

    Grid mapping rated companies by EV/Revenue against revenue growth, both cut at sector medians, to characterize situations.

    Eight names clear both the growth bar and the margin bar; nine clear only one of the two. That split is useful for framing where a management team's own levers sit relative to peers. This page characterises situations — it isn't a buy or sell call on any name.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Eight Names Clear Both the Growth Bar and the Margin Bar; Nine Clear Only One Cut on EV / Revenue vs the sector median (5.8x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (18%) (columns) · 7 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Priced up and Growing Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 8 names argenx SE (ARGX) · Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (KNSA) · ImmunityBio, Inc. (IBRX) · +5 more 8 names sit above the middle multiple and above the middle growth rate, among them argenx SE (ARGX), TG Therapeutics, Inc. (TGTX) and Omeros Corporation (OMER). For a company here the work is holding the forecast through the next readout, since the forward lens already credits it. Priced up on Something Other than Pace Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 4 names Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) · Xencor, Inc. (XNCR) · Zura Bio Limited (ZURA) · +1 more 4 names hold an above-middle multiple with a below-middle forecast growth line, including Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) and ALX Oncology Holdings Inc. (ALXO). Collaboration and milestone revenue can move a reported line without changing pipeline value, and diligence will test which is which. Growing Without the Multiple Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 5 names ImmuCell Corporation (ICCC) · Invivyd, Inc. (IVVD) · Compugen Ltd. (CGEN) · +2 more 5 names grow faster than the middle of the set while pricing below it, including Compugen Ltd. (CGEN) and Invivyd, Inc. (IVVD). Revenue quality, owned-versus-partnered economics and label-expansion breadth are the levers a management team here controls directly. Below Both Lines Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 8 names Genmab A/S (GMAB) · Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) · BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (BMRN) · +5 more 8 names sit below both lines, among them Genmab A/S (GMAB), Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) and BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (BMRN). Several carry substantial product revenue, where a forward revenue multiple is the harder lens and mix, pricing and cost structure carry the story.

11. 11
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Revenue Mix, Pricing and Retention Stay in a Board's Hands Before the Next Readout

    NeuraCap's view on the operating questions — revenue mix, pricing and retention — a board should resolve before the next readout.

    Revenue mix, pricing and retention are levers a board controls well before any external event — a partnering conversation, a readout, anything else. These are observations built on the cohort data in this report, not recommendations. Getting ahead of them is what keeps a management team, not a counterparty, setting the terms of the next conversation.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Revenue Mix, Pricing and Retention Stay in a Board's Hands Before the Next Readout NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 Decide Whether You Own the Chemistry or Rent It The top of this range sits alongside companies that hold their own engineering — linker-payload chemistry, Fc design, masked-antibody control. In-licensed enabling technology brings royalty stacking and freedom-to-operate dependencies that narrow delivered economics at launch. What changes the answer: A licensor stack or third-party Fc claim that materially thins the net royalty at your expected launch. Settle Whether the Story Is One Asset or an Engine Repeat partner validation across programmes reads differently from a single pivotal readout carrying the whole value. OmniAb, Inc. (OABI) and other platform-facing names sit at the top of this range without a commercial product behind them. What changes the answer: A second partner-funded programme reaching dose expansion on the same platform. Choose Which Rights You Keep and Which You Place Territorial carve-outs — retaining or placing Greater China or Japan rights separately — are ordinary in this sector. Partnering funds the runway to the next inflection, and it also moves downstream royalty away from the balance sheet that a buyer would credit. What changes the answer: A territorial offer priced against your own peak-sales view rather than against current burn. Shape the Revenue Mix a Revenue Lens Actually Rewards With most of this set read on forward revenue, the composition of that line matters: milestone and collaboration income behaves differently from product sales in a peer comparison. Mix, pricing and the pace of label expansion are the parts a management team sets. What changes the answer: A milestone-heavy year that lifts the reported line without changing the pipeline behind it.

12. 12
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the precedent transaction record.

    Nine transactions anchor what's next — acquirers here range from large-cap pharmaceutical buyers to mid-cap consolidators, and they kept buying through the repricing.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Acquirers Kept Buying Through the Repricing 9 transactions in the record, from large-cap pharmaceutical buyers to mid-cap consolidators. 04 of 06 Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12

13. 13
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Announced Deal Prices Mark Where Buyers Have Been Willing to Value Whole Companies Here

    Three of sixteen disclosed-terms transactions presented as case studies, with multiples on LTM financials at announcement.

    These announced deals mark where buyers have actually paid to own whole companies in this space — AbbVie's purchase of ImmunoGen was announced at 9.9x revenue, and Merck completed its acquisition of Harpoon Therapeutics at $88M. Deal multiples here run on LTM at announcement, a different basis from the CY2027E public multiples elsewhere in this report, so we're not claiming a spread between them. What we can say is that buyers have shown up at more than one point in this range. The full sixteen-deal list sits in the appendix for anyone tracing a specific structure.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Announced Deal Prices Mark Where Buyers Have Been Willing to Value Whole Companies Here 3 of 16 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 67 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13 Sep-2025 $7.6B Genmab A/S acquires Merus N.V. EV / LTM revenue 1.1x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Genmab A/S sits in this set as a clinical-stage biologics developer, and Merus N.V. brings programmes in the same modality neighbourhood. The transaction suggests a buyer consolidating depth inside a modality it already runs, rather than buying entry into a new one. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Recorded at $7.6B with 1.1x on revenue. A low revenue multiple against a large disclosed value points to a target priced on its pipeline rather than on its current revenue line, which is how most of the clinical-stage names in this set are read. Sep-2022 $628M Sesen Bio, Inc. acquires Carisma Therapeutics Inc. EV / LTM revenue 26.7x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Buyers in this record cluster into two groups: large-cap pharmaceutical acquirers replacing revenue ahead of exclusivity expiries, and mid-cap biopharma adding depth in a therapeutic franchise where a salesforce already sits. Where buyer and target share a modality or an indication, the logic the transaction suggests is franchise depth rather than entry into new ground. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Clinical-stage targets in this sector are customarily priced against cash-adjusted enterprise value, with the balance sheet treated as a near-dollar-for-dollar credit. Benchmarked against the peer set, a revenue multiple on a target like this reads as a proxy for pipeline value rather than delivered product economics. Apr-2023 $471M Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. acquires Zymeworks Zanidatamab Inc. EV / LTM revenue 1.1x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Deals here are commonly structured as an upfront payment with development and commercial milestones behind it, and increasingly carry contingent value rights that bridge disagreement over a binary readout or a label breadth assumption. Territorial carve-outs and option-to-acquire structures are ordinary rather than exceptional in this record. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Headline value in structures of this kind reflects the signing payment, while the balance sits behind clinical and regulatory events. Against the peer set, that makes disclosed multiples a floor on what the asset could ultimately earn rather than a settled price.

14. 14
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing operating levers management teams control.

    From the market's view we move to what a management team can actually move on its own.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What a Management Team Can Actually Move Operating levers that sit inside the company rather than in the market. 05 of 06 Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14

15. 15
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    Value in This Sector Separates on Growth and Margin, and Both Are Operating Choices

    NeuraCap's view that growth and margin, the two variables separating this range, are both operating choices.

    Growth and margin are the two variables that separate the top of this range from the bottom, and both are set inside the company, not by the market. That reframes the question for the next twelve months from where the market places you to which of these two levers you move first. These are directional views built on the data in this report, not recommendations.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Value in This Sector Separates on Growth and Margin, and Both Are Operating Choices NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15 FOR OWNERS Your Multiple Is Set Inside the Clinical-Stage Group, Not Against the Sector Average 60 of the 63 companies here are clinical-stage biologics developers, and the full range from top tier to bottom tier sits inside that one group. The comparison that matters is against the names running your modality and therapeutic area, on the same forward lens. FOR BOARDS Runway to the Next Readout Is the Variable Diligence Keeps Returning To With only 6 of the 63 companies carrying a meaningful forward EBITDA, a buyer underwrites cash to the inflection, the patent estate and freedom to operate. Build-versus-buy on enabling chemistry, and the order in which indications are sequenced, are decisions taken well before any counterparty is in the room. FOR PARTNERS AND ACQUIRERS The Record Shows Buying at Both Ends of the Range Across the 9 transactions shown, disclosed values run from small cash-adjusted purchases of clinical-stage developers to the largest deal in the record, and structures unbundle consideration across upfronts, milestones and contingent value rights. Fit within an existing franchise is the common thread among the strategic buyers on this page.

16. 16
    SECTION 06

    06

    Section divider introducing the full comparables set, methodology and sources.

    The last section carries the full universe behind every figure in this report, plus the basis and sourcing for each one.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16

17. 17
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    First page of the public comparables table, grouped by valuation tier against the 5.8x sector median.

    This table carries the rated portion of the universe company by company, with tickers linked to the underlying source. Teal marks names above the 5.8x median and amber marks names below it, so a client can place any single name in the range at a glance. The remaining rated rows and the unrated names sit in the companion workbook.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (5.8x); amber marks below · 32 rated companies; 31 not rated (no eligible EV/Revenue) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 30 of 32 rated names shown here; the remaining 2 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥12.1x · median 17.6x · 8 companies Arcus Biosciences, Inc. RCUS Clinical-stage biologics developers $2.4B 52.0x -40% n/a n/a MoonLake Immunotherapeutics MLTX Clinical-stage biologics developers $594M 31.0x n/a n/a n/a ImmunityBio, Inc. IBRX Clinical-stage biologics developers $9.7B 21.9x 96% n/a n/a Vir Biotechnology, Inc. VIR Clinical-stage biologics developers $1.3B 17.9x n/a n/a n/a Zura Bio Limited ZURA Clinical-stage biologics developers $163M 17.4x 13% n/a n/a OmniAb, Inc. OABI Clinical-stage biologics developers $657M 15.1x 24% n/a n/a Xencor, Inc. XNCR Clinical-stage biologics developers $1.8B 14.3x -13% n/a n/a Adagene Inc. ADAG Clinical-stage biologics developers $69M 12.7x 18% n/a n/a CORE — 2.4x–12.1x · median 5.8x · 16 companies Cullinan Therapeutics, Inc. CGEM Clinical-stage biologics developers $569M 11.9x n/a n/a n/a ALX Oncology Holdings Inc. ALXO Clinical-stage biologics developers $60M 11.2x 16% n/a n/a Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. KNSA Biologics-led pharmaceutical developers $11.3B 9.2x 23% n/a n/a Janux Therapeutics, Inc. JANX Clinical-stage biologics developers $74M 8.5x n/a n/a n/a CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. CTMX Clinical-stage biologics developers $242M 8.0x 20% n/a n/a argenx SE ARGX Clinical-stage biologics developers $56.7B 7.4x 24% 33% 57 TG Therapeutics, Inc. TGTX Clinical-stage biologics developers $8.8B 6.7x 38% n/a n/a

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    Second page of the public comparables table, continuing the same tier grouping.

    This continues the same comparables table, still cut against the 5.8x sector median with the same tier shading. Together these two pages carry the rated names referenced throughout this report. The companion workbook holds the balance of the universe for anyone who wants the complete set.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (5.8x); amber marks below · 32 rated companies; 31 not rated (no eligible EV/Revenue) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 30 of 32 rated names shown here; the remaining 2 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 CORE — CONTINUED — 2.4x–12.1x · median 5.8x · 16 companies Omeros Corporation OMER Clinical-stage biologics developers $1.3B 6.2x 72% n/a n/a Compugen Ltd. CGEN Clinical-stage biologics developers $88M 5.5x 57% n/a n/a Whitehawk Therapeutics Inc WHWK Clinical-stage biologics developers $54M 5.0x 24% n/a n/a ImmuCell Corporation ICCC Clinical-stage biologics developers $95M 5.0x 27% n/a n/a Genmab A/S GMAB Clinical-stage biologics developers $25.6B 4.9x 17% 36% 53 Prothena Corporation plc PRTA Clinical-stage biologics developers $141M 4.8x n/a n/a n/a ADMA Biologics, Inc. ADMA Clinical-stage biologics developers $2.4B 3.8x 18% 48% 65 Agenus Inc. AGEN Clinical-stage biologics developers $363M 2.6x -1% n/a n/a BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. BMRN Clinical-stage biologics developers $10.7B 2.4x 14% 26% 40 DISCOUNT — <2.4x · median 1.2x · 8 companies Sutro Biopharma, Inc. STRO Clinical-stage biologics developers $77M 2.2x -31% n/a n/a Grifols, S.A. GRFS Commercial-stage biologics franchises $18.2B 2.0x 6% 31% 38 Kamada Ltd. KMDA Specialty biologics and follow-on manufacturers $436M 1.9x 11% 29% 40 Alector, Inc. ALEC Clinical-stage biologics developers $41M 1.2x n/a n/a n/a Connect Biopharma Holdings Limited CNTB Clinical-stage biologics developers $17M 1.2x n/a n/a n/a Invivyd, Inc. IVVD Clinical-stage biologics developers $93M 1.1x 45% n/a n/a

19. 19
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    First page of the precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    This page lists the disclosed-terms transactions behind the deal analysis earlier in this report, newest first, with deal values linked to the underlying filing. Sixteen of the recorded transactions carry disclosed terms; the balance without a disclosed value or multiple sit in the companion workbook rather than in this list. Multiples here are LTM at announcement, not the CY2027E basis used for the public comparables.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 67 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jan-2026 GlaxoSmithKline LLC → RAPT Therapeutics, Inc. $911M n/a n/a GlaxoSmithKline LLC announced the acquisition of RAPT Therapeutics, Inc. at $911M, the most recent transaction in this record. Large-cap acquirers replacing revenue ahead of exclusivity expiries have been persistent buyers of immunology-facing clinical assets. Nov-2025 Day One Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. → Mersana Therapeutics, Inc. $285M 8.6x n/a Day One Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. completed the purchase of Mersana Therapeutics, Inc. at $285M, recorded at 8.6x revenue. That mark sits above the middle of the peer set on the same revenue basis. Oct-2025 Novo Nordisk Health Care AG → Omeros Corporation $2.1B n/a n/a Novo Nordisk Health Care AG announced the acquisition of Omeros Corporation (OMER) at $2.1B. Omeros Corporation (OMER) also sits in the core tier of this set, with a forecast growth line above the covered middle. Sep-2025 Genmab A/S → Merus N.V. $7.6B 1.1x n/a Genmab A/S announced the acquisition of Merus N.V. at $7.6B, the largest disclosed value in this record, recorded at 1.1x revenue. Buyer and target both sit in the bispecific neighbourhood of this sector. Oct-2024 Aryzta AG (North America) → Zentalis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. n/a n/a 13.6x Aryzta AG (North America) announced a transaction for Zentalis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. recorded at 13.6x EBITDA, with no enterprise value disclosed. Profit multiples are uncommon in this record, and the revenue lens carries most of the comparison. Apr-2024 Merck & Co., Inc. → Harpoon Therapeutics, Inc. $88M 2.0x n/a Merck & Co., Inc. completed the acquisition of Harpoon Therapeutics, Inc. at $88M. Disclosed values of this size are consistent with cash-adjusted pricing, where the target's balance sheet is credited close to dollar for dollar. Apr-2024 Kintara Therapeutics, Inc. → TuHURA Biosciences, Inc. $5M n/a n/a Kintara Therapeutics, Inc. completed a transaction with TuHURA Biosciences, Inc. recorded at $5M. The size and shape are consistent with the reverse-merger route into a cash-carrying listed company, a recognised path to the public market for private developers here. Jan-2024 Bruckman, Rosser, Sherril & Co. Inc. → Junshi Biosciences, Co., Ltd. n/a n/a 8.6x Bruckman, Rosser, Sherril & Co. Inc. announced a transaction for Junshi Biosciences, Co., Ltd. recorded at 8.6x EBITDA, with no enterprise value disclosed. Financial buyers in this sector tend to concentrate on operating businesses at the edge of it rather than on… Nov-2023 AbbVie Inc. → ImmunoGen, Inc. n/a 9.9x n/a AbbVie Inc. announced the acquisition of ImmunoGen, Inc. at 9.9x revenue, with no enterprise value disclosed here. The mark sits above the middle of the peer set on a revenue basis, alongside a target with linker-payload chemistry of its own.

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    Second page of the precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    This continues the same transaction list on the same LTM-at-announcement basis. Between these two pages sits the complete disclosed-terms record referenced in the deal case studies. The companion workbook carries the transactions without disclosed terms for reference.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 67 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Apr-2023 Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. → Zymeworks Zanidatamab Inc. $471M 1.1x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Sep-2022 Sesen Bio, Inc. → Carisma Therapeutics Inc. $628M 26.7x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jul-2020 EnCana → Compass Therapeutics LLC n/a n/a 6.6x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. May-2020 Sanofi → Regeneron $64.1B 9.1x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Mar-2020 Gilead Sciences, Inc. → Forty Seven, Inc. n/a 1.8x n/a May-2017 Norgine → Merus Labs n/a 3.3x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. n/a Sanofi S.A. → Inhibrx Biosciences, Inc. $1.9B n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.

21. 21
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    Page setting out the report's sources, valuation basis, and how data-quality exclusions were handled.

    Every figure in this report traces back to the record it was taken from — public filings, consensus estimates or market prices as of the date on the cover. We've been explicit about what's excluded: multiples that fail the platform's plausibility checks, and transactions without disclosed terms, are kept out of the charts and listed separately rather than blended in. That transparency is what lets a client trust a multiple or a deal figure enough to use it in their own analysis. Treat this page as the reference point whenever a number in this report needs tracing back to its source.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 21 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (32 of 63 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (32 of 63 companies), so this report follows it. EV / Revenue on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Antibody and Protein Therapeutics and it clears the coverage gate with 32 of 63 companies (51%). P / E is carried as a cross-check. A revenue lens is used rather than a profit multiple because the set is not consistently profitable on a forward basis (6 of 63 names with a meaningful EBITDA). DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 304 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 1526 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (1525) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

22. 22

    One Sector Label, Three Price Tiers, and the Spread Sits Inside the Clinical-Stage Group.

    Closing slide restating the report's core finding: one sector label, three price tiers, with the spread inside the clinical-stage group.

    One sector label, three price tiers, and the spread sits inside the clinical-stage group. The companion tables carry the full universe and source index for any figure worth tracing further.

    Everything on this page

    One Sector Label, Three Price Tiers, and the Spread Sits Inside the Clinical-Stage Group. NeuraCap AI — Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 22

More coverage in Health Care

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Antibody and Protein Therapeutics Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Medical Imaging Equipment Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Medical Imaging Equipment Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Medical Devices Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026