Selling, General, and Administrative Costs: Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. vs ImmunityBio, Inc.

Biotech Giants' SG&A Spending: A Decade of Strategic Choices

__timestampImmunityBio, Inc.Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.
Wednesday, January 1, 2014432600017986000
Thursday, January 1, 201522620600032480000
Friday, January 1, 20169439100068081000
Sunday, January 1, 201753821000169906000
Monday, January 1, 201835463000248932000
Tuesday, January 1, 201946456000354100000
Wednesday, January 1, 202071318000433300000
Friday, January 1, 2021135256000583300000
Saturday, January 1, 2022102708000752700000
Sunday, January 1, 2023129620000887600000
Monday, January 1, 20241007200000
Loading chart...

Data in motion

A Tale of Two Biotechs: SG&A Expenses Over Time

In the competitive world of biotechnology, managing costs is crucial for success. This chart compares the Selling, General, and Administrative (SG&A) expenses of Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. and ImmunityBio, Inc. from 2014 to 2023. Over this period, Neurocrine Biosciences consistently outpaced ImmunityBio in SG&A spending, with a peak in 2023 where their expenses were nearly 7 times higher than ImmunityBio's. This trend highlights Neurocrine's aggressive investment in administrative and sales functions, possibly reflecting a strategy to expand market presence and drive growth. Meanwhile, ImmunityBio's more conservative spending approach may indicate a focus on cost efficiency or a different growth strategy. Understanding these financial strategies provides valuable insights into how these companies navigate the biotech landscape, balancing innovation with fiscal responsibility.

Published by
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Source link
sec.gov

Date published
17 Jan 2025