CymaBay Therapeutics, Inc. and BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: SG&A Spending Patterns Compared

Biotech SG&A: BioCryst vs. CymaBay's Financial Strategies

__timestampBioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.CymaBay Therapeutics, Inc.
Wednesday, January 1, 201474610008185000
Thursday, January 1, 2015130470008871000
Friday, January 1, 2016112530009645000
Sunday, January 1, 20171393300012387000
Monday, January 1, 20182951400014381000
Tuesday, January 1, 20193712100019238000
Wednesday, January 1, 20206792900017425000
Friday, January 1, 202111881800023040000
Saturday, January 1, 202215937100025116000
Sunday, January 1, 202321389400051953000
Loading chart...

Data in motion

SG&A Spending Patterns: A Tale of Two Biotechs

In the competitive world of biotechnology, strategic financial management is crucial. Over the past decade, CymaBay Therapeutics, Inc. and BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. have demonstrated contrasting approaches to their Selling, General, and Administrative (SG&A) expenses. From 2014 to 2023, BioCryst's SG&A expenses surged by nearly 2800%, peaking in 2023. This reflects their aggressive expansion and investment in administrative capabilities. In contrast, CymaBay's SG&A expenses grew by approximately 535% over the same period, indicating a more conservative growth strategy. Notably, in 2023, BioCryst's SG&A expenses were about four times higher than CymaBay's, highlighting their differing operational scales. These spending patterns offer insights into each company's strategic priorities and market positioning. As the biotech industry continues to evolve, understanding these financial dynamics is essential for investors and stakeholders alike.

Published by
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Source link
sec.gov

Date published
17 Jan 2025