Royalty monetization – an alternative financing instrument

In  the  last  years,  we  have  seen  that  royalty monetization  has  gained more  momentum  as an  alternative  source  of  funding  for  biotech and  pharma  companies  (together  referred  to as “Biotechs”).  With  an  increasing  desire  by biotech shareholders to dilute as little as possible, it is worthwhile for Biotechs to properly understand and analyse this financing alternative.

What is royalty monetization?

The  concept  of  royalty  monetization  is  based on the exchange  of  lump sum  payment today in exchange for a stream of future payments on 
a licensing agreement. In other words, a royalty stream purchaser (referred to as “royalty aggregator”) will pay a fixed “purchase price” to a Biotech in exchange of (a piece of) the milestone(s) and royalty streams received  by the Biotech  from a  third-party licensing partner (licensee).  The advantages for the Biotechs are clear: 
1. The company receives immediate, non-dilutive and non-recourse funding.  
2. The out-licensed program is de-risked from the financial point of view of the biotech. The risk related to the program that is covered by the transaction  is  shifted  to  the  royalty monetization aggregator. The acquired future milestone and royalty payments will directly flow to the 
royalty  aggregator,  meaning  that  all risk related to these payments is completely borne by the royalty aggregator. The reason for this is that 
theoretically,  the  “purchase  price” paid out by the royalty aggregator should represent the fair value of the program  –  i.e.  the  value  of  all  risk-adjusted milestone and royalty payments that the Biotech should receive in the future.  As a result, if the program fails during the development,  the  Biotech  does  not face a total financial losses it has already  received a “purchase price” that covers  potential risk-adjusted 
milestone payments and royalty streams that are sold. 
3. The biotech does not lose any control over the company and/or other programs  in  development  as  royalty 
aggregators  are  typically  not  looking for board seats or voting rights when providing the funding 
4. The biotech can use the proceeds freely. The two most commonly usages of proceeds  we see are: a) financing of other development projects or b) distributing funds to shareholders  to  recuperate  some  of (the initial) investment to de-risk their investment  in  the  venture.  The  last option  in  particular  would  be  more difficult  with  raising  equity  since  this would  not  align  with  the  interest  of new investors. 
5. In certain cases it can be an alternative for debt financing, which can be expensive (due to warrants) and encumbers the IP.

How is the “purchase price” determined?

Valuation is at the heart of every royalty monetization transaction. The Biotech is selling (a piece of) the future cash flow of the contract for cash now. Hence the future value of the licensing contract needs to be established. Therefore, in a mutually beneficial royalty monetization transaction the “purchase price” should reflect the fair value of all risk-adjusted out licensing payments that the Biotech will receive in the future from the licensee. In reality, the Biotech will never receive 100% of the fair value of the out-licensing streams, even if asset performance expectations were identical for both royalty aggregator and Biotech (i.e. both parties use the same sales forecast). The reason for this is that the royalty aggregator should receive a risk premium for going into the transaction and offering capital today to the Biotech against the licensing cashflows in the future. In other words, the Biotech needs to pay a price to receive the future cashflow today.

Simplified cashflow structure of a RM transaction

Just as in the original licensing transaction negotiated between the Biotech and licensee, the difference in the expectations of the royalty aggregator and the biotech have to be bridged as the biotech typically has a more optimistic view on the future revenues than the royalty aggregator which may lead to varying desired purchase price estimations. Finally, other negotiation-related factors will play an important role when defining the purchase price, such as: the need for additional capital of the Biotech, other available financing options, the type of asset considered, the place of the asset in the licensee’s pipeline, strength and reputation of the licensee, risk appetite of the aggregator, geographical coverage, tax and legal considerations etc.

As with equity investors, royalty aggregators will have different preferences and limits in investment focus and mandates that will dictate the feasibility and structure of the final royalty monetization agreement.

Royalty aggregators

Royalty aggregators are typically companies that purely focus on financial transactions – i.e. they do not take-over development efforts or organize commercialization of the out-licensed assets. In other words, they are solely a financial investor entering into a bilateral agreement with the biotech.

As mentioned, each royalty aggregator can have a different investment focus. The main investment criteria will be typically ticket size, therapeutic area / indication, geography and clinical development phase of the underlying asset. The last item is particularly important, as the more advanced clinical assets are, the less risky the investment becomes. This will have a positive impact on the valuation and corresponding ticket size. For the royalty aggregator this means that they will need to provide more capital or buy a smaller portion of the economics to make the transaction potentially interesting to the Biotech.

In recent times, royalty aggregators have emerged that focus on early clinical stage partnered assets rather than approved or marketed assets as the big players (such as Royalty Pharma) typically do. This opens up an avenue for Biotechs with early stage partnered assets to monetize (a piece of) the future economics. For these Biotechs it can be interesting to monetize a piece of the future economics in order to de-risk and obtain direct additional funding, whilst keeping a part of the potential upside and associated news flow that comes with reaching the different value infliction points.

Another important factor is the quality and reliability of the licensee. This factor will be relevant for the royalty aggregator, as they will depend on receiving the royalty and milestone payments from the licensee. This means that it is critical that the licensee has a good reputation that includes a low risk of default and a low likelihood of non-payment.

When screening for investment opportunities, royalty aggregators will take into account all the factors mentioned above in addition to the motivation of a biotech to enter into a royalty monetization transaction for the above-mentioned reasons.

Summary

Royalty monetization may be an interesting financing alternative for Biotechs that already have out licensed one or more of their (IND/clinical stage) programs to a (larger) pharma/biotech company and are looking for additional financing. There are multiple royalty aggregators that can be interested in providing such capital in return for (a portion of) the future economics of the licensing contracts concluded. When analysing the attractiveness of such a transaction, a robust and realistic valuation is one of the elements to consider carefully.

Lastest posts

View all posts->
August
29
-
,
2025
- release at
CET

The Rise of Synthetic Royalties and Royalty-Backed Debt in Europe

The Rise of Synthetic Royalties and Royalty-Backed Debt in Europe

Royalty financing and synthetic royalties are reshaping biotech and pharma funding in Europe. As venture funding tightens—Q2 2025 saw biotech venture capital drop to $4.8B, falling to pre-2018 levels—European companies are increasingly adopting alternative funding models. Notably, over 20% of global synthetic royalty and drug development deals now involve European players, a major leap in just two years.
August
25
-
,
2025
- release at
CET
US

Royalty Pharma to Acquire Royalty Interest in Amgen’s Imdelltra for up to $950 Million

Royalty Pharma to Acquire Royalty Interest in Amgen’s Imdelltra for up to $950 Million

Imdelltra is a first-in-class immunotherapy for the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) marketed by Amgen Royalty Pharma to pay $885 million upfront; BeOne Medicines to retain a $65 million option to sell additional portion of its royalty
June
30
-
,
2025
- release at
CET
US

BridgeBio Raises $300 Million Through Partial Capped Monetization of BEYONTTRA® European Royalty

BridgeBio Raises $300 Million Through Partial Capped Monetization of BEYONTTRA® European Royalty

PALO ALTO, Calif., June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BridgeBio Pharma, Inc. (Nasdaq: BBIO) (“BridgeBio” or the “Company”), a new type of biopharmaceutical company focused on genetic diseases, today announced it has sold a portion of royalties due to the Company from sales of BEYONTTRA in Europe to HealthCare Royalty (“HCRx”) and funds managed by Blue Owl Capital (“Blue Owl”) for $300 million. This royalty financing agreement monetizes select anticipated royalties and provides immediate less-dilutive capital to the Company.
View all posts->

Request a free calculation of your royalties

Fill in a form with key details and we’ll get back to you with calculation

Request calculation