Will BridgeBio's SG&A as a percentage of net product revenue decline below 70% by Q4 2026?

Q4 2025 SG&A/revenue ratio was ~94% ($147M/$146M). To reach below 70% by Q4 2026, Attruby revenue needs to reach ~$210M+ with flat SG&A, or revenue of $250M with moderate SG&A growth to $175M. If Attruby sustains 15-20% QoQ growth through 2026: Q1 ~$175M, Q2 ~$205M, Q3 ~$240M, Q4 ~$275M. At $275M revenue and SG&A of $175M (modest 19% growth from $147M), ratio = 64% — well below 70%. The math works if revenue growth sustains. The committee's EXCEEDING execution rating supports this scenario.

The numerator (SG&A) may not be as stable as the leverage math assumes. Pipeline launch preparations for encaleret and BBP-418 will add incremental SG&A throughout 2026 — new commercial teams, market access, medical affairs expansion. The Atomic Auditor specifically noted that 'dual commercial infrastructure creates step-function cost risk.' If SG&A grows to $190M by Q4 2026 (29% growth), revenue needs to be above $271M for sub-70% ratio. This is achievable but requires the strong end of revenue growth scenarios.

The shared rare disease commercial platform is a genuine efficiency advantage. Medical affairs, market access, and distribution infrastructure overlap across indications. The Atomic Auditor specifically noted this reduces marginal launch costs vs. unrelated therapeutic areas. If the shared platform thesis holds, SG&A growth from pipeline launches would be more modest than standalone builds. Combined with Attruby's strong revenue trajectory, sub-70% by Q4 2026 is more likely than not. Management's 2028 profitability target implicitly requires this kind of leverage improvement.

The 24-point decline in SG&A/revenue ratio (from ~94% to below 70%) in just 4 quarters is aggressive. Revenue must roughly double while SG&A grows modestly. If we model Q4 2026 Attruby revenue at $225M (conservative) with SG&A at $165M (12% growth), ratio = 73% — still above 70%. To get below 70%, revenue needs to be closer to $240M+ with controlled SG&A. This requires close to 15% sustained QoQ growth. Possible but the question is sensitive to both variables.

The Atomic Auditor debate about $600M profit by 2028 is relevant here — Opus modeled the path as achievable with Attruby at $1.2-1.5B run rate, while Sonnet called the timeline aggressive. SG&A leverage is the leading indicator. If the committee couldn't converge on the 2028 profitability target, they can't converge on the intermediate SG&A leverage milestone either. The underlying question is whether revenue growth sustains at 15%+ QoQ through all of 2026 — four consecutive quarters of double-digit growth while launching new products. Possible, not certain.

The tafamidis IP outcome creates a scenario fork that makes this particularly uncertain. If patents are upheld, Attruby's growth trajectory likely sustains or accelerates, and SG&A leverage improves rapidly — sub-70% is probable. If patents are invalidated and generic tafamidis enters, revenue growth could decelerate while SG&A remains high for pipeline launches — sub-70% becomes much harder. The IP outcome is roughly 38% probability of invalidation. Weighting: 62% * 65% (favorable IP, sub-70% likely) + 38% * 25% (adverse IP, sub-70% unlikely) ≈ 50%.

Revenue growth trajectory and partially fixed SG&A create natural leverage. If Attruby reaches $250M+ in Q4 2026, sub-70% is achievable even with moderate SG&A growth. EXCEEDING execution supports revenue trajectory. Pipeline costs add uncertainty.

24-point ratio improvement in 4 quarters is aggressive. Requires both strong revenue growth and SG&A discipline simultaneously. Pipeline launches push SG&A higher. Revenue growth is the swing factor. Roughly coin-flip.

The shared commercial platform and strong revenue trajectory favor improvement. But the IP uncertainty and pipeline launch costs create meaningful headwinds. Slightly above coin-flip reflecting the positive execution track record.