TeamDrive
RUS

Biotech boom powers analysts to $4M-a-year salaries: WSJ

30 August 2018

Nick Paul Taylor / FierceBiotech

The biotech boom is having a big effect on the pay packets of equity analysts, according to The Wall Street Journal. Driven by a desire to show they understand biotech, banks are reportedly paying analysts up to $4 million a year, several times more than the typical salary in other industries.

Analysts assess companies and write reports that help investors gauge their prospects and interpret news. Their work was separated from that of their colleagues in banking in the 2000s amid reports analysts were hyping companies to drum up business. Yet a perceived link between the prestige of an analyst and a company’s ability to win banking business survived the regulatory clampdown.

“To attract business on financing side, banks must have high-quality analysts respected by the buy side … who will be fair, credible and insightful,” Citigroup’s Yigal Nochomovitz told the WSJ.

Nochomovitz is reportedly among the analysts to benefit from those dynamics. Citigroup is said to have given Nochomovitz a big raise to keep him at the company. Matthew Harrison also reportedly secured a sizable pay bump from Morgan Stanley after fielding offers from rival firms.

Morgan Stanley knows there is a real risk an analyst will take up a better offer. The bank lost Andrew Berens to Leerink Partners earlier this year. Other recent moves include Alethia Young’s switch from Credit Suisse to Cantor and Michael Yee’s arrival at Jefferies. Yee reportedly left RBC Capital Markets after Jefferies offered $4 million a year. The other analysts are said to have received “lucrative” offers. 

The $3 million-plus pay packets set biotech apart from other industries, where around $1 million a year is a typical salary. The potential for analysts to burnish the image of their employer in biotech circles and thereby help win business from the industry may account for some of the difference. Another possibility is that the complex science and unproven assets of biotechs make them harder to analyze than companies in other industries, which typically IPO as established businesses. 

Source


Previous publication Next publication

Media Center

  • 31 October 2018

    Scientists unveiled a more effective approach for assessing drug response

    Scientists from Eli Lilly and Company, the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (New York, USA) and Sema4 (Stamford, USA) released results from a proof-of-concept study demonstrating that patient-derived cells offer a more effective approach for assessing drug response than conventional methods.

  • 30 October 2018

    Researchers developed an AI approach to identify antibiotic resistance genes

    Researchers at the University of California San Diego (USA) have developed an approach that uses machine learning to identify and predict which genes make infectious bacteria resistant to antibiotics. The approach was tested on strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis – the bacteria that cause tuberculosis (TB) in humans. It identified 33 known and 24 new antibiotic resistance genes in these bacteria.

  • 29 October 2018

    Expanding the reach of gene editing with a new CRISPR enzyme

    The CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing system has been widely studied because of its potential therapeutic applications, but limitations in the number of locations on the genome it can target remain a major drawback. Now scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have identified a new Cas9 enzyme that they say can help CRISPR reach more gene mutations.

  • 26 October 2018

    Biotech Backed by Bain, Pfizer loads prime CNS assets into new biotech

    Pfizer has followed through on its pledge to divest a hunk of its neuroscience R&D, spinning several programs into a new company called Cerevel Therapeutics backed by $350 million in venture funding. Pfizer is contributing a trio of clinical-stage drug candidates—including a Parkinson’s therapy due to start phase 3 testing next year—plus a clutch of earlier-stage programs, while Bain Capital and affiliates stumped up the initial funding.

Read more