Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. or BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Who Manages SG&A Costs Better?

SG&A Cost Management: Taro vs. BioCryst

__timestampBioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Wednesday, January 1, 2014746100091733000
Thursday, January 1, 20151304700087644000
Friday, January 1, 20161125300092365000
Sunday, January 1, 20171393300085656000
Monday, January 1, 20182951400088196000
Tuesday, January 1, 20193712100089971000
Wednesday, January 1, 20206792900093413000
Friday, January 1, 202111881800091355000
Saturday, January 1, 2022159371000113676000
Sunday, January 1, 2023213894000198366000
Monday, January 1, 2024218935000
Loading chart...

Data in motion

SG&A Cost Management: A Tale of Two Pharmaceutical Giants

In the competitive world of pharmaceuticals, managing Selling, General, and Administrative (SG&A) expenses is crucial for profitability. Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. have shown contrasting trends in their SG&A expenses over the past decade. From 2014 to 2023, Taro maintained a relatively stable SG&A cost, averaging around $113 million annually, with a notable peak in 2023. In contrast, BioCryst's SG&A expenses surged by nearly 280% from 2014 to 2023, reflecting their aggressive expansion strategy. While Taro's consistent cost management suggests a focus on operational efficiency, BioCryst's rising expenses indicate a potential investment in growth and innovation. As of 2023, Taro's SG&A expenses were approximately 7% lower than BioCryst's, highlighting their effective cost control. However, the absence of BioCryst's 2024 data leaves room for speculation on their future financial strategy.

Published by
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Source link
sec.gov

Date published
17 Jan 2025