iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
There is no reliable single dollar figure for what a biotech CEO earns compared with leaders at similarly sized companies. Companies define “similar size” differently, and compensation disclosures use measures that are not interchangeable. A useful comparison matches company scale and business maturity, then separates salary, cash incentives, equity awards and total compensation.
Why “similar size” is not one fixed category
Biotech companies can be similar in market value yet differ sharply in revenue, headcount, commercial maturity and pipeline. Compensation committees build company-specific peer groups from several of these factors, often adding business complexity and the market for executive talent. A peer group is a reference set for a particular compensation cycle, not a universal definition of a biotech company’s size.
Recent proxy statements illustrate the variation. The 2026 proxy from a public commercial biopharmaceutical company describes a 2025 peer group generally spanning $800 million to $7.3 billion in market capitalization, $220 million to $2 billion in annual revenue, and 225 to 2,000 employees. Those are that company’s selection criteria, not an industry standard. In the same proxy, the company placed at the 44th percentile for peer revenue, 52nd percentile for market capitalization and 58th percentile for headcount in 2025. These percentiles describe its position within its chosen peer set; they do not describe CEO pay.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Immunocore’s 2026 proxy gives a different example: its fiscal 2025 compensation peer criteria, selected in September 2024, included U.S. or U.K. public biotech or pharmaceutical companies with 175 to 1,500 employees and market capitalizations of $600 million to $6.0 billion. The company’s projected revenue reference point was about $300 million, and the criteria set an annual-revenue ceiling below $800 million. These figures describe Immunocore’s particular peer-selection approach, not a sector-wide band.
#1 Best Overall
BeiGene’s 2025 proxy shows why revenue alone can be a poor size match for a company whose development and commercial operations are changing. Its criteria emphasized comparable scope and complexity, research and development, commercialization, and market capitalization between 0.33 and 3 times its own. Revenue was secondary because it can lag development; the filing says BeiGene was near the peer median in market capitalization and estimated revenue when the 2025 peer group was approved.
What to match before comparing CEO pay
A credible comparison should state where the companies align and where they do not. Record at least these characteristics for each company and the relevant year:
Rank #2
- Market capitalization: include the measurement date or averaging period, since market value changes and proxy analyses may use historical averages.
- Revenue: identify the fiscal year or trailing period, and distinguish reported revenue from a projection.
- Headcount: use the same reporting period where possible.
- Stage and commercial maturity: distinguish pre-commercial development businesses from companies with marketed products.
- Scope and complexity: account for pipeline, product portfolio, research and development, commercialization and organizational reach.
- Geography and talent market: note where a company operates and which executives it competes to recruit.
- CEO role and tenure: consider whether the leaders have comparable responsibilities, experience and time in the role.
Biogen’s 2026 proxy makes the talent-market dimension explicit: it describes peer selection around business scope, global reach, a research-based business with multiple marketed products, and the executive talent pool it competes for. It also says its 2025 peer group was reviewed in October 2025 and adjusted for 2026 compensation decisions to better align with Biogen’s size, revenue and market capitalization. Peer groups can therefore change from one compensation cycle to another.
Compare the same compensation measures
Even a well-matched company set will mislead if the pay figures measure different things. Separate the main components rather than relying on one headline total:
- Base salary: fixed cash pay for the role.
- Annual cash incentive: distinguish target opportunity from the amount actually paid.
- Equity awards: identify the grant-date value and type of award where disclosed.
- Total compensation: check which components and valuation rules the figure includes.
Also label whether a figure is target compensation, compensation reported in the proxy’s Summary Compensation Table, realized compensation, or realizable compensation. A grant-date equity value is not the same as the value an executive ultimately receives. Amgen’s 2026 proxy says its committee reviews CEO realized and realizable compensation and gathers peer CEO compensation-element data from SEC filings, including 25th-, 50th- and 75th-percentile comparisons.
Dates and circumstances matter alongside the measure. Match fiscal years and CEO roles, and identify one-time or new-hire awards and changes in CEO service when the proxy discloses them. A peer-group range selected for one year should not be casually paired with pay figures from another year.
Rank #4
- Used Book in Good Condition
How to read peer percentiles and committee judgment
A median is a reference point, not a pay formula. Amgen describes using 25th, 50th and 75th percentile data and says its committee may account for role scope, organizational structure, experience, performance, tenure and market demand, among other considerations. The proxy’s peer financial references include 12-month average market capitalization as of June 30, 2024, and trailing-four-quarter revenue through March 31, 2024, with a stated exception for Sanofi. Those dates matter: percentile comparisons are tied to particular cohorts and financial periods, not timeless market values.
Immunocore likewise says peer data is a market check considered alongside other factors rather than a direct determinant of each pay element. A company may place a CEO above or below a peer median for reasons such as role breadth, company structure, performance or recruiting pressure. As a result, a percentile does not by itself explain why a particular CEO received a particular award.
Best Value
What the available figures can—and cannot—show
The proxy examples establish how several companies construct and revise compensation peer groups. They do not provide a harmonized statistic for median biotech CEO compensation among companies in a defined size band. The market-capitalization, revenue and headcount ranges above are peer-selection criteria, while the cited percentiles describe company position within a selected group; none is a CEO-pay benchmark.
To answer “what do biotech CEOs earn at companies of similar size?” for a specific case, first choose the company and compensation year, then identify its proxy-defined peers and compare equivalent pay components using the same valuation basis. Preserve the dates and qualifications attached to each figure. Without that work, a sector-wide dollar answer would imply comparability the disclosures do not establish.
Sources: 2026 proxy, commercial biopharmaceutical company peer criteria; BeiGene 2025 proxy; Immunocore 2026 proxy; Biogen 2026 proxy; Amgen 2026 proxy.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
