Speaker 1: We'd like to interview you about how we can make
Speaker 1: Shared Lunch better. We've got a survey happening right now
Speaker 1: and we'd love your feedback. It just takes a few minutes,
Speaker 1: and if you're a New Zealand resident, you can go
Speaker 1: on the drawer to one of six fifty dollars Charisi's gifts.
Speaker 1: The link is in our show notes right now.
Speaker 2: Sura, and welcome to this episode of Shared Lunch, where
Speaker 2: we lift the lid on the weight loss drug boom
Speaker 2: in the US. It's been big business for pharmaceutical companies
Speaker 2: for a while, but how do investors know if it's
Speaker 2: a fad or weather this promise. I'm your host, Halen Madison,
Speaker 2: and I'll be discussing this with doctor Deborah Lambe, global
Speaker 2: Equities analyst at Milford Asset Management.
Speaker 3: Investing involves risk you might lose the money you start with.
Speaker 3: We recommend talking to a licensed financial advisor. We also
Speaker 3: recommend reading product disclosure dot douments before deciding to invest.
Speaker 3: Everything you're about to see and hear is current at
Speaker 3: the time of recording.
Speaker 2: Great to have you on the program. Dead after your
Speaker 2: trip to America.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it was much warmer in the States. I actually
Speaker 4: spend quite a significant portion of the time in Vegas,
Speaker 4: so it was about thirty five degrees when I was there,
Speaker 4: which was really nice. A bit of a shock to
Speaker 4: come back to the cold, rainy Auckland, but hopefully it
Speaker 4: doesn't last too long.
Speaker 2: Wind to hear now, deb let's start with what you
Speaker 2: do at Milford and the reason for your trip to
Speaker 2: the US, which I understand included seeing a number of
Speaker 2: pharmaceutical companies.
Speaker 4: So at Milford, I'm in the global equities team, which
Speaker 4: means I'm not looking at companies in New Zealand or Australia. Rather,
Speaker 4: I'm focused on listed companies that are based in the US,
Speaker 4: in Japan, and in Europe. And you mentioned my trip
Speaker 4: to the US, so traveling and getting on the road
Speaker 4: is an important part of what we do. And I've
Speaker 4: just spent two weeks, a pretty well win couple of
Speaker 4: weeks in the US. The first thing days I visited
Speaker 4: seven cities and drunk much more coffee than is probably
Speaker 4: healthy for me. And then the trauff itself comprise of
Speaker 4: a few independent days where I've visited companies by myself
Speaker 4: and then visiting two conferences, so one was a global
Speaker 4: bio Farmer conference, and then one was a global healthcare
Speaker 4: investing conference, and I guess you also asked why is
Speaker 4: it important to do this? So when I go and
Speaker 4: visit a company and talk to the management team, I'm
Speaker 4: going to be testing the assumptions that I have about
Speaker 4: the company. So is what we believe about that company correct,
Speaker 4: looking for risks that we may not be aware of,
Speaker 4: and then also thinking about how is the management team
Speaker 4: thinking about opportunities and then also challenges that it's facing.
Speaker 4: And it's not just about visiting companies that we already
Speaker 4: invest in, but it's also about visiting companies or hearing
Speaker 4: from companies that might be a new company to invest in.
Speaker 4: So it's a great source of new ideas as well.
Speaker 2: Now it'd be good to actually put in context the
Speaker 2: size of the pharmaceutical industry in the US. I mean,
Speaker 2: the numbers are eye watering from Australia and New Zealand's perspective,
Speaker 2: but also maybe the future and the potential that this
Speaker 2: sector has.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So the pharmaceutical industry itself in the US, pharmaceutical
Speaker 4: industry itself is it's massive. So more than five hundred
Speaker 4: billion dollars per year as the size of the industry,
Speaker 4: which that to kind of put that in context, that's
Speaker 4: bigger than the GDP of countries like Austria and Norway,
Speaker 4: and that's more than twice the GDP of US here
Speaker 4: in New Zealand. And then if you think about, though,
Speaker 4: of course, the US technology industry, that's a whopping one
Speaker 4: point seven trillion, So it's smaller than that, but it
Speaker 4: is for something that's essentially mostly selling small white pills,
Speaker 4: it's pretty big numbers. And then you also asked about
Speaker 4: I guess like future growth. So the pharmaceutical industry itself,
Speaker 4: it's forecast to grow about five percent per ADDAM through
Speaker 4: to twenty thirty and that's driven by a few factors,
Speaker 4: but one that I would really call out is this
Speaker 4: aging population and changing demographics that we have. And that's
Speaker 4: not just in the US, but that's also here in
Speaker 4: New Zealand. And so if you think about our population
Speaker 4: of people over sixty, that's forecast to double by twenty fifty,
Speaker 4: and then the number of people that are aged over
Speaker 4: eighty that's actually going to triple by twenty fifty. So
Speaker 4: that means a much greater proportion of people that need
Speaker 4: medicines for their chronic conditions and also to manage their
Speaker 4: quality of life. I suppose two.
Speaker 2: With medicines. One thing investors really need to think about too,
Speaker 2: if they're looking at such sectors is that it takes
Speaker 2: a while for a medicine to be developed and go
Speaker 2: through all the tests and the regulation, et cetera.
Speaker 4: That's exactly right, and that pharmaceutical industry itself, and for
Speaker 4: me is an investor learning about it, it's quite a
Speaker 4: kind of complicated industry and for companies itself, getting a
Speaker 4: medicine on the market is both time rechieving and expensive.
Speaker 4: So to have a medicine approved for use, it has
Speaker 4: to go through phase one, Phase two, phase three clinical trials,
Speaker 4: and then the approval proceeds, and that's very expensive, and
Speaker 4: I think from memory it costs around two billion dollars
Speaker 4: per drug that's approved on average. On average, it takes
Speaker 4: about ten years. And then also if you look at
Speaker 4: that whole process, a lot of companies fall out, a
Speaker 4: lot of companies, a lot of medicines fall out along
Speaker 4: the way. So around only seven percent of molecules that
Speaker 4: start at phase one make it all the way through
Speaker 4: to phase three clinical trials, and then of course, once
Speaker 4: you have that medicine approved, so the regulator gives it
Speaker 4: a tick, it says that it's safe and effective in patients.
Speaker 4: Then what happens is is that it's given a period
Speaker 4: of loss of exclusivity on the market. And what that
Speaker 4: means is that copycats can't come in and copy the medicine.
Speaker 4: But that only has a finite life, and so after
Speaker 4: that's on average ten years, and so after ten years,
Speaker 4: what happens is then other companies can copy that molecule
Speaker 4: and produce what's called a generic medicine. So then at
Speaker 4: that point in time, then what we see is the
Speaker 4: price of the drug falls rapidly, so normally to the
Speaker 4: tune of seventy percent in and revenue from that molecule
Speaker 4: falls away. So that means that farmer companies here on
Speaker 4: this kind of wheel of having to make new drugs
Speaker 4: which then have a period of exclusivity and then that
Speaker 4: revenue drops right away. So for drug companies to continue
Speaker 4: to grow, they have to be continually innovating and have
Speaker 4: medicines coming through that pipeline over time.
Speaker 2: Gosh, quite a juggle then actually jumping into weight loss drugs,
Speaker 2: I mean they have been talked about a lot. There's
Speaker 2: a fair bit of hype. Why do you think it
Speaker 2: has sort of struck a cord?
Speaker 4: Yeah, and this is this is a really interesting one.
Speaker 4: And one of the companies that I actually visited on
Speaker 4: the trip was Elight Lilly, which is one of the
Speaker 4: leaders in the weight loss in the weight loss race,
Speaker 4: and there's been heaps of focus on the weight loss
Speaker 4: phenomenon recently, despite the fact that weight loss medicines have
Speaker 4: actually been around for quite a long time, and so
Speaker 4: they were initially developed for use in diabetes to help
Speaker 4: people manage their weight and blood sugar levels. But what's
Speaker 4: driven the excitement over the past kind of twelve months
Speaker 4: is new research that has shown that these medicines provide
Speaker 4: benefit not just in people who have diabetes, which is
Speaker 4: around five percent of the population, but also in people
Speaker 4: who are oh weight or obese, which means that the
Speaker 4: pool of people that can use them jumps from that
Speaker 4: five percent to thirty three percent of the population. And
Speaker 4: then the other really important thing that's been shown in
Speaker 4: these clinical studies is not only do these medicines provide
Speaker 4: a benefit in terms of the weight loss, but also
Speaker 4: they provide other health benefits. So if you take these
Speaker 4: medicines for a period of time, it will reduce your
Speaker 4: risk of heart attack, it will reduce your risk of stroke,
Speaker 4: it will reduce the progression of your kidney disease, it
Speaker 4: will reduce the pain if you have arthritis. So it's
Speaker 4: the combination of now proving out that it's a much
Speaker 4: broader pool of people that can benefit from them, and
Speaker 4: then also that the benefit extends beyond that of weight
Speaker 4: loss alone.
Speaker 2: What about, though, if you stop taking these strikes. I mean,
Speaker 2: they've got all those other aspects and benefits by the
Speaker 2: sounds of things, But do you have to stay on
Speaker 2: them forever?
Speaker 4: And yeah, this is a really good question, and it's
Speaker 4: actually something that invests a debating, But what the trials
Speaker 4: show so far is that to your point, to keep
Speaker 4: the weight loss off, you have to stay on these medicines.
Speaker 4: And as soon as you stop taking the medicine, slowly
Speaker 4: but surely, the weight comes back on. And so they're
Speaker 4: self administered injections, and they essentially work by making you
Speaker 4: feel full and suppressing your appetite. And so when you're
Speaker 4: no longer taking them, that means that you basically you
Speaker 4: don't feel for that fullness your appetite comes back and
Speaker 4: then slowly but surely that weight will just come back on.
Speaker 2: What about the side effects? So this seems to be
Speaker 2: always side effects for drugs no matter what you take.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think that's true. And so there is side
Speaker 4: effects with these medicines, but so far the evidence is
Speaker 4: that they're generally pretty well tolerated and the main side
Speaker 4: effects are things like nausea, upset stomach and that kind
Speaker 4: of thing. But there hasn't been anything so far that
Speaker 4: would be a really risky side effect that people have
Speaker 4: to be worried about.
Speaker 2: Given these new weight loss drugs, I mean, how much
Speaker 2: weight can you actually lose on them? And also what
Speaker 2: is the bar for obesity?
Speaker 4: So currently all the research has been done on people
Speaker 4: that have a b ANDI over twenty seven, so that's
Speaker 4: classified as overweight or obese, so they're not for you
Speaker 4: some people who are a normal weight or a healthy
Speaker 4: or a healthy weight range, which is be in eighteen
Speaker 4: to twenty four. And then what we see is if
Speaker 4: you take these medicines for a year, on average average
Speaker 4: person will lose between fifteen to twenty percent of their
Speaker 4: body weight. So if you take Novo Nordics ozempic you
Speaker 4: lose on average fifteen percent and Eli Lilly's medicines interesting
Speaker 4: are slightly more effective and you'll lose an average twenty
Speaker 4: percent of your body weight. And what we're seeing is
Speaker 4: that next generation versions of the drug that are currently
Speaker 4: in earlier clinical trials, they're showing a similar safety profiles
Speaker 4: but losing more like twenty five percent of your body weight.
Speaker 2: So what about in this part of the world, can
Speaker 2: you actually get hold of these medicines or is that
Speaker 2: some way off?
Speaker 4: Yes that so so far, what we've seen is that
Speaker 4: Novo Nordous medicine ozempic that has been approved for use
Speaker 4: and both diabetes and obesity. But Eli Lindity's medicine so
Speaker 4: far has just been approved for use in diabetes but
Speaker 4: not yet obesity, so the company is going through that
Speaker 4: approval process now. And then another thing that's important to
Speaker 4: keep in mind is that even though they're approved for
Speaker 4: use here and in Australia, they're not yet funded. So
Speaker 4: in New Zealand it's not funded by FARMAC. So that
Speaker 4: means that if you are prescribed that medicine, you are
Speaker 4: paying out of pocket cost yourself to take that medicine
Speaker 4: and those are expensive, so around one thousand dollars per
Speaker 4: person per month just to take the medicine. And then
Speaker 4: the other factor to layer on top of this as
Speaker 4: well is that there's been massive global shortages of the medicine.
Speaker 4: So in Australia been able to get their hands on
Speaker 4: a little bit of supply, but here in New Zealand
Speaker 4: there's been very little, if not any, people able to
Speaker 4: take it so far.
Speaker 2: And what about the pricing. If the supply and demand,
Speaker 2: wouldn't it go up and you'd be paying more again?
Speaker 4: And that's it's kind of interesting because in most markets
Speaker 4: you would expect that really high demand with a constrained supply,
Speaker 4: that you would see prices go up, especially in the
Speaker 4: short term until more supply comes online. But in the
Speaker 4: farmer market, when the drug is approved, prices are negotiated
Speaker 4: at that point in time and so they're set and
Speaker 4: then what you see is over time, generally the price
Speaker 4: of medicines actually will come down a little bit over time.
Speaker 4: So this means maybe while we're supply constrained in the
Speaker 4: near term, that prices will be able to stay a
Speaker 4: little bit higher, so there'll be less pricing pressure over time.
Speaker 4: But we still expect the overtime prices will come down.
Speaker 2: Now, deb you're a medical doctor, you aren't practicing at
Speaker 2: the moment. I think you've been out for about seven years.
Speaker 2: But what do you think would you be prescribing these
Speaker 2: medicines given what you know?
Speaker 4: Yeah, so seven years it's time does really fly. But
Speaker 4: I would say so based on what I know. Mine
Speaker 4: understanding is there's a really good basic evidence to show
Speaker 4: that these demonstrate good health benefits and people over a
Speaker 4: sustained period of time when they take them, and also
Speaker 4: also basically that the risks are pretty are pretty small.
Speaker 4: Side effect profile is good. So I am with the
Speaker 4: caveat that I'm not currently practicing. I see Nobodyson why
Speaker 4: I wouldn't prescribe these.
Speaker 2: Now, let's look at some of the companies involved in
Speaker 2: this weight loss drag race, if you like. There's some
Speaker 2: some pretty big ones and some pretty big numbers. As
Speaker 2: we've just discussed, it'd be quite good too to see
Speaker 2: how their share prices have performed given this new theme,
Speaker 2: if you like.
Speaker 4: So, the two main the two main leaders in the
Speaker 4: weight loss race are Eli Lilly, Who's the US company
Speaker 4: that I visited while I was on my trip. And
Speaker 4: then also there's a Danish company called Novo Nordisk, and
Speaker 4: that is a Danish company. And so what we've seen
Speaker 4: is that all of this information, all of this new
Speaker 4: information has driven really strong share price performance over the
Speaker 4: past year. So shares an Eli Lilliar up around ninety
Speaker 4: two percent I think last time I checked, and then
Speaker 4: shares a Novo Nordisk up around seventy percent. So it's
Speaker 4: been pretty stellar performance. And it's also meant that these
Speaker 4: companies they are now pretty big companies. And so to
Speaker 4: put it into context, if you look at the size
Speaker 4: of these two companies combined and then you compare it
Speaker 4: to all one hundred and eighty one companies that we
Speaker 4: have listed on our New Zealand Stock Exchange, these two
Speaker 4: companies are worth more than thirteen times all of our
Speaker 4: listed companies combined.
Speaker 2: At the same time, the prices might be high, I'm
Speaker 2: not sure whether you've looked at the price to earnings ratio,
Speaker 2: which is obviously what investors use as a sometimes fairly
Speaker 2: blunt instrument to understand whether you're getting valued that but
Speaker 2: there's also they're also spending a fee bit of capex
Speaker 2: or capital to actually bring these medicines to market, aren't they?
Speaker 4: And so I guess on the pe ratios, if you
Speaker 4: look at what Eli Lilly is trading on relative to
Speaker 4: Novo Nordisk, relative to other farmer companies, these are on
Speaker 4: eyewatering multiples. So they are pretty they look optically pretty expensive.
Speaker 4: They do have a great growth opportunity ahead of them,
Speaker 4: but to your point, they are also spending a lot
Speaker 4: and the kind of manufacturing of these is very complicated
Speaker 4: and I think combined, by twenty twenty eight, it's expected
Speaker 4: that they will spend around fifty billion dollars on capex.
Speaker 4: And so one of the debates that investors are kind
Speaker 4: of thinking about is are the shares getting overvalued? Because
Speaker 4: while the growth opportunity is very exciting, there's no I guess,
Speaker 4: in my mind, there's no debating the opportunity. The key
Speaker 4: debate is really the valuation and then how much of
Speaker 4: that is reflected in the valuation of these shares.
Speaker 2: Now we've talked about valuation in terms of thinking about
Speaker 2: investing in the sector, and there's probably a number of
Speaker 2: other things that investors need to think about. There's the exclusivity,
Speaker 2: that's the time it takes to actually get a medicine
Speaker 2: to market. Are there other issues that have been brought
Speaker 2: up with this new theme if you like.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and I think with these farmer companies specifically and
Speaker 4: the weight loss opportunities specifically aside, putting valuation aside, the
Speaker 4: key questions would be priced. So how long will the
Speaker 4: price stay at one thousand dollars per person per month?
Speaker 4: And what will the price be in twenty thirty and
Speaker 4: then what will the price be when other competitors bring
Speaker 4: their products to market because competition is on the horizon. Also,
Speaker 4: another debate is will people want to say on these
Speaker 4: medicines for life? Because as we know, you stop taking
Speaker 4: the medicine, the weight comes back on. That's a massive
Speaker 4: commitment for someone to be taking either an injection currently
Speaker 4: every week for a month or an oral pill for life.
Speaker 4: And the third is given the high price point of
Speaker 4: the medicines currently, will governments and house systems want to
Speaker 4: pay for them? Will be able to pay for them?
Speaker 4: Because if you think about it, if it's one in
Speaker 4: three keywis a classified as overweight or obese so could
Speaker 4: benefit from these medicines and effort costs currently one thousand
Speaker 4: dollars per person per month and you sum that up,
Speaker 4: that's a massive cost for our healthcare system. So the
Speaker 4: price kind of it's like where does the price land
Speaker 4: and then how does that impact the proportion of people
Speaker 4: that are on the medicine are kind of key debates
Speaker 4: that investors are focusing on.
Speaker 2: Another thing I think investors probably need to think about too,
Speaker 2: is are they a one show pony. I mean, hopefully
Speaker 2: a pharmaceutical company has got a few strings to its
Speaker 2: bo For example, Eli Lilly, I think is also getting
Speaker 2: an Alzheimer's drug towards market production, aren't they?
Speaker 4: Yes? Yes, And this is it's a key difference between
Speaker 4: Novo Nordicic and Eli Lilly. Is Novo Nordicic is currently
Speaker 4: it's basically solely focused on diabetes and weight loss medicines,
Speaker 4: whereas Eli Lilly is a much more diversified company. So
Speaker 4: not only does it have its weight loss medicine, it
Speaker 4: has gone Alzheimer's medicine coming. It also has an oncology portfolio.
Speaker 4: So they are quite two different companies when you think
Speaker 4: about what sits in them and then the Alzheimer's opportunity.
Speaker 4: That's something that investors have been pre focused on for
Speaker 4: a while now. There's currently two main companies, so Eli Lilly,
Speaker 4: and there's also a US company called Biogen, which has
Speaker 4: been kind of like vying to get in the Alzheimer's market.
Speaker 4: And Biogen has had a few controversies along the way
Speaker 4: with its Alzheimer's medicine. The first was approved back in
Speaker 4: twenty twenty one, and this was controversial because it was
Speaker 4: the first disease modifying Alzheimer's treatment, and so that means
Speaker 4: that it works to reduce the progression of the actual disease.
Speaker 4: But the approval was controversial because it just showed improvement
Speaker 4: in the scans of brains of people with Alzheimer's, but
Speaker 4: it didn't actually prove that it improved their symptoms. And
Speaker 4: so there are a number of people that actually resigned
Speaker 4: from the FDA, which is a regulary body on the
Speaker 4: bottom of that. On the back of that, and then
Speaker 4: they were also very criticized because of the high price
Speaker 4: point that the medicines were priced at at that point
Speaker 4: when they were approved, which I think from memory was
Speaker 4: around fifty six thousand dollars per person per year, So
Speaker 4: that's much higher price than the weight loss drugs, for example.
Speaker 4: But then so Biogen they've got a new CEO's coming.
Speaker 4: They've since had a subsequent version of the medicine that's
Speaker 4: been approved that does show improvement in symptoms of people
Speaker 4: with Alzheimer's disease. And then also what we've seen is
Speaker 4: that they've cut the price dramatically. It's still expensive. I
Speaker 4: think it's maybe twenty six thousand dollars per person per year,
Speaker 4: which is a lot, but it's come down from that
Speaker 4: fifty six thousand.
Speaker 2: Fascinating. I think Alzheimer's and the drugs and the race
Speaker 2: is probably a whole episode in its south dev which
Speaker 2: I think we'll probably come back to just getting back
Speaker 2: to manufacturing these pharmaceuticals. Has AI had much of a
Speaker 2: place here in terms of speeding things.
Speaker 4: Up, So this AI kind of in farmer companies and
Speaker 4: in drug discovery. It's been a topic that investors are
Speaker 4: kind of increasingly focused on and increasingly excited about. And
Speaker 4: one of the key kind of themes or takeaways I
Speaker 4: would say that I really noticed when I was in
Speaker 4: the US is just how excited companies are about the
Speaker 4: use of AI and drug discovery. Because we've already talked
Speaker 4: about how time consuming and expensive it is to develop
Speaker 4: new medicines. And what we've seen is that the developments
Speaker 4: in AI mean that you can develop new molecules around
Speaker 4: ten times as fast, or so, you can design new
Speaker 4: molecules around ten times as fast, you can run simulations
Speaker 4: on those molecules around a hundred times as fast. And
Speaker 4: then there's this new concept, which I think is pretty interesting.
Speaker 4: You've heard of the concept of a self driving car.
Speaker 4: There's this new concept of a self driving lab. And
Speaker 4: so what this means is that you have AI and
Speaker 4: then you robotics, and so you use AI and robotics
Speaker 4: together and they drive the cycle of kind of prediction,
Speaker 4: experimentation and analysis, which means that you can iteratively identify
Speaker 4: new compounds which you then run experiments on, which then
Speaker 4: mean that the whole process is much faster and then
Speaker 4: importantly more cost effective for companies.
Speaker 2: Gosh, So do we have any idea how much that
Speaker 2: would speed things up? We talked about ten years before
Speaker 2: being the time that it can take, I think for exclusivity,
Speaker 2: but I think you know, when you've got a medicine
Speaker 2: in the wings that can take even longer, can't it?
Speaker 4: Yeah, And I think it's I think it's probably too
Speaker 4: early yet. To put an actual number on how much
Speaker 4: it could speed things up. But I think what we're
Speaker 4: seeing is more and more companies are talking about it,
Speaker 4: more and more companies are using it in their drug
Speaker 4: discovery process. So I think over time we'll be able
Speaker 4: to get a better sense of how much time it
Speaker 4: actually is taking off the drug discovery process. But to
Speaker 4: the extent that it means we can develop medicines that
Speaker 4: are cheaper, I feel like that could only be a
Speaker 4: good thing given the high costs of healthcare that we're
Speaker 4: seeing around the world now.
Speaker 2: Just thinking about investors looking to invest in the sector,
Speaker 2: I mean, there are those direct stocks, they are probably
Speaker 2: quite expensive at the moment for some people. But also
Speaker 2: what about ETFs. I know on cheeseys, for instance, we've
Speaker 2: got about five or at least there's more actually pharmaceutical
Speaker 2: ETFs that people can look to. They are mainly in
Speaker 2: the US. But also I did see that there was
Speaker 2: a couple of applications for more themed weight loss ETFs
Speaker 2: by I think Amplify and round Tel investments were two,
Speaker 2: though I don't think they've actually come to fruition yet.
Speaker 4: So I guess when you're thinking about healthcare, health care
Speaker 4: itself is super broad, and then within that there's all
Speaker 4: different kinds of companies, so hospitals, medical device companies, companies
Speaker 4: that sell chemicals that are used in farmer companies that
Speaker 4: sell tools that are used in farmer So all of
Speaker 4: that kind of sets in the broader healthcare space. And
Speaker 4: I think if you're thinking about getting a broad kind
Speaker 4: of eatif exposure, maybe one way to get a sense
Speaker 4: of what could be better is looking back at what's
Speaker 4: happened over time. And if you look back over a
Speaker 4: significant period of time, say twenty years, the s and
Speaker 4: P five hundred index and the SMP Healthcare Index have
Speaker 4: actually interestingly performed basically neck on neck, So they both
Speaker 4: generated around a ten percent return per year over a
Speaker 4: twenty year time horizon. If you look at farmer itself,
Speaker 4: that generated around half a percent lower return, so around
Speaker 4: nine and a half percent over that twenty year period
Speaker 4: of time. But if you had managed to pick farmer
Speaker 4: winner Novo or farmer Winner Eli Lilly over that period
Speaker 4: of time, you would have generated I think from memory
Speaker 4: it's around a sixteen percent return per ANIM and then
Speaker 4: a twenty five percent return per ANIM. Picking a winner
Speaker 4: can be great, but then if you're looking at a
Speaker 4: diversified exposure, as she would suggest that rather than looking
Speaker 4: for a narrow farmer exposure, a broader healthcare exposure would
Speaker 4: be better. And then I think especially worth keeping in
Speaker 4: mind with a diversified eatia for Farmer, you're likely to
Speaker 4: have a higher exposure to the largest companies and they
Speaker 4: may have a higher proportion of medicines that are coming
Speaker 4: up to that loss of exclusivity and revenue and revenue
Speaker 4: dropping off. So that's a really important thing to keep
Speaker 4: in mind with Farmer itself, is what is that loss
Speaker 4: of exclusivity burden and how does that sit across the
Speaker 4: companies that are in that etf.
Speaker 2: Well, we could talk for ages dead. There's so much
Speaker 2: to unpack here, but look, thanks so much for your
Speaker 2: insights today and coming in even though you have got
Speaker 2: a cold.
Speaker 4: Thanks so much for having me. It's been awesome to
Speaker 4: be here.
Speaker 2: And thanks to everyone for joining in. But before you go,
Speaker 2: we'd be really keen if you could fill out our
Speaker 2: audience survey, which you'll find in the show notes. Alne,
Speaker 2: you take few minutes and you'll be in the drawer
Speaker 2: to win fifty dollars to invest, So stay warm and
Speaker 2: stay safe, and we'll see you next time on shed lunch.