长远视角：中国制药与生物技术公司研发实力比较

The Long View: Comparing R&D muscles of China Pharma & It’s been a while since our last deep-dive in R&D capabilities - we provide an update herewith three sets of analysis to assess R&D efficiency across companies, andInnovent, Rebecca Liang, Ph.D.+852 2123 2656rebecca.liang@bernsteinsg.comEllie Li+852 2123 2621ellie.li@bernsteinsg.com Economic return on R&D.This is the most important measure as it looks at the abilityto turn R&D spending into revenue. To evaluate the return on company level, we need tocompare revenue from innovative drugs to the cumulative R&D spending a few years back.At the time of our previous assessment, most companies had been too “young” withoutenough years of R&D data. Now we can get to the return from two angles: 1) sales returnon R&D and license income return on R&D (see detailed formula in Exhibit 1). Results: 1)Leading biotech companies have seen a moderate increase in their sales return onR&D from 2023 to 2025, while pharma players, except Hansoh, suffered a decline R&D efficiency - timeline and conversion. 1) Time-to-market: we calculate themedian time between IND application to marketing approval for all innovativeproducts.The average is 2100 days for oncology products and 2900 days for non-oncology for our coverage. In both categories, Zai Lab has the shortest time-to-market,not surprising given their business model of in-licensing late-stage global products thatonly require Ph3 or bridging studies in China. Among companies with substantial internalpipelines,Innovent consistently leads in time-to-market, 1067 days in oncology Size and quantity measures.1) Pipeline size: Hengrui still dominates with quantity with360+ assets. Notably Innovent now has over 100 assets, entering the level of maturebiopharma; also highest potentially FIC % at 28% vs. average c. 20%. 2) No. of trials: BERNSTEIN TICKER TABLE DETAILS FRAMEWORK FOR RETURN AND EFFICIENCY METRICS CONCLUSIONS FIRST: RETURN ON R&D SPENDING We estimate a clear shift in China pharma/biotechs R&D return dynamics by 2030E (Exhibit 2). In 2025, Hansoh delivers thehighest sales return on R&D, followed by Innovent, while Kelun Biotech leads peers in license income return despite minimalinnovative drug sales. Looking to 2030E, Akeso and Innovent are expected to outperform peers across both innovative salesand licensing income-derived R&D returns, driven by the rapid sales ramp-up for their innovative assets and rising milestone/ RETURN ON R&D: INNOVATIVE DRUG SALES OVER CUMULATIVE R&D EXPENSES Our analysis measures innovative drug sales return on R&D asinnovative product sales divided by 4-year cumulative R&Dspending incurred4 years prior to the sales reporting year, capturing lagged R&D payback. Across covered biotechs,we estimatesteady, accelerating innovative sales returns on R&D for Innovent and Akeso by 2030E, supported bytheir robust domestic commercial ramp-ups alongside controlled R&D spending growth; by contrast, BeOne is expected toexperience flat returns as revenue growth modest post Brukinsa uptake while R&D outlays continue rising (Exhibit 3). Forcovered pharma companies,Hansoh maintains the highest near-term R&D sales return despite with limited upside EXHIBIT 4:We forecast a steady recovery for Hengrui to 1.7x by 2028E backed by its innovative drug commitment;in contrast, we foresee CSPC facing headwinds as it navigates a transition phase marked by high R&D ahead of RETURN ON R&D: LICENSE INCOME OVER CUMULATIVE R&D EXPENSES Our methodology calculates BD income return on R&D aslicensing revenue divided by 3-year cumulative R&D spendingincurred 3 years prior, tracking lagged payoff from global partnership investments. For covered biotechs, we foresee out-licensing to remain a core monetization driver. Specifically,Akeso is expected to leadas its AK112 will enter a milestone androyalty harvest phase soon following potential FDA approval in 2027E. Kelun Biotech is anticipated to face a near-term returndrop as its core asset sac-TMT still in global Ph3 trial development. In addition, we expectInnovent to see a sharp licensing return jump in 2027Efrom potential milestone received from Takeda (Exhibit 5). For covered pharma companies, we anticipate EFFICIENCY METRICS: SPEED AND CONVERSION TIME-TO-MARKET: FROM IND APPLICATION TO NDA APPROVAL We usetime-to-market as a proxy to evaluate drug development efficiency for covered companies, calculated as thenumber of days from the first IND application (CDE acceptance date) to first market authorization (CDE results release date). ByTA,oncology assets generally feature faster time-to-market vs. general medicine assets, driven by higher unmet needsand greater regulatory focus on oncology innovations. By company type,biotechs are structurally more development-efficient than pharma companies,owing to agile clinical execution and more specialized focus on targeted innovativeassets. Among covered companies,Innovent consistently registers the shortest time-to-marke