There is no single reliable dollar benchmark for what a biotech CEO earns at a company of similar size. Companies define their own peer groups using factors such as market value, revenue, employee count, development stage, commercial reach and competition for executive talent. To make a useful comparison, first match companies on those dimensions, then compare like-for-like pay measures and dates.
Why “similar size” needs a definition
Market capitalization alone does not make two biotech companies comparable. A company with marketed products, substantial revenue and a global workforce has a different operating scope from a development-stage business whose value rests largely on its pipeline. Public-company compensation committees therefore combine several measures and use judgment rather than applying a universal size threshold.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
One biopharmaceutical company’s 2026 proxy describes a 2025 compensation peer group with market capitalizations of $800 million to $7.3 billion, annual revenue of $220 million to $2 billion and 225 to 2,000 employees. Within that group, the company reported that it was at the 44th percentile for revenue, 52nd for market capitalization and 58th for headcount. These are that company’s selection criteria and relative positions—not industry standards or CEO-pay figures. 2026 proxy statement
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Other companies draw the comparison differently:
| Company and proxy context | Peer-group criteria or reference | What the example illustrates |
|---|---|---|
| Immunocore, 2026 proxy; group selected September 2024 for fiscal 2025 pay decisions | U.S. or U.K. public biotech or pharmaceutical companies; 175–1,500 employees; $600 million–$6.0 billion market capitalization; annual revenue below $800 million, compared with roughly $300 million in projected company revenue | Geography and workforce can be combined with market value and revenue, while peer data remains one input rather than a formula. Immunocore 2026 proxy |
| BeiGene, 2025 proxy; 2024 peer criteria | Market capitalization between 0.33 and 3 times the company’s size; scope, complexity, R&D and commercialization also considered | Revenue was secondary because it can lag development, making it a less useful standalone match for a changing pipeline. BeiGene 2025 proxy |
| Amgen, 2026 proxy; 2025 peer assessment | CEO pay compared at the 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles; financial reference periods included 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 | Percentile comparisons depend on dated inputs and the peer set, not just a company’s current size. Amgen 2026 proxy |
Biogen’s 2026 proxy adds another consideration: the talent market. It describes peer selection based on business scope, revenue and market capitalization, global reach, a research-based business with multiple marketed products, and the executives the company competes to hire. Biogen says it reviewed its 2025 group in October 2025 and adjusted the group for 2026 compensation decisions to align more closely with its size, revenue and market capitalization. Biogen 2026 proxy
#1 Best Overall
Dimensions to match before calling companies peers
- Market capitalization: record the measurement date or averaging period; the figure changes over time.
- Revenue: specify the fiscal period and whether it is actual, estimated or projected.
- Headcount: use the disclosed employee count and its date where available.
- Business maturity: distinguish commercial companies from development-stage companies and note marketed products, pipeline and R&D scope.
- Operating context: consider geography, global reach, organizational complexity and the scale of the CEO’s role.
- Talent competition: note whether the companies recruit from similar executive labor markets.
For example, a revenue match may be misleading when one company’s revenue reflects established products and another’s current revenue understates a fast-moving development program. The comparison should identify which dimensions align and which do not, rather than labeling the companies simply “the same size.”
Which compensation figures are comparable?
“CEO compensation” can refer to different measures. At minimum, compare salary, annual cash incentive, equity awards and total compensation separately. Then state whether the figures represent target pay, amounts reported in the Summary Compensation Table, realized compensation or realizable compensation. Those measures answer different questions and should not be mixed into a single ranking.
Rank #2
- Salary: the fixed cash component for the relevant year.
- Annual cash incentive: distinguish the target opportunity from the amount actually paid.
- Equity awards: identify the grant-date value and any one-time, new-hire or other unusual award disclosed in the proxy.
- Total compensation: specify the reporting measure used and the fiscal year.
- Realized or realizable pay: where disclosed, keep these separate from grant-date values; equity’s eventual value can differ materially from its reported value at grant.
Amgen says it reviews CEO realized and realizable compensation and collects peer CEO compensation-element data from SEC filings. Its 2026 proxy describes percentile comparisons, but the figures are tied to the stated peer group and financial reference periods; they are not a universal sector benchmark. Amgen 2026 proxy
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
How to interpret peer percentiles and committee judgment
A percentile tells you where a company’s chosen comparison point sits within a selected peer group. It does not establish that every CEO should be paid at that level or that companies in the same percentile have equivalent roles and circumstances.
Rank #3
- Used Book in Good Condition
Amgen says its committee may account for structural differences, strategic importance, internal equity, executive experience and performance, tenure, role scope and impact, and market demand. Immunocore describes peer information as a market check considered alongside other factors, not as a direct determinant of each pay element. Its proxy states: “Instead, the remuneration committee considers peer data as part of a market-check analysis that is used in conjunction with its assessments of numerous other factors, as noted under ‘Factors Used in Determining Executive Compensation’ below.” Immunocore 2026 proxy
Peer groups also change. Immunocore’s disclosed criteria were selected in September 2024 for fiscal 2025 decisions; Biogen describes a later review and revised group for 2026 decisions. A comparison should use the peer group relevant to the pay year rather than assume that a company’s cohort remains fixed.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.A practical method for comparing two biotech CEOs
- Choose a common fiscal year and geography. Align the reporting years and note whether the companies compete in the same executive talent markets.
- Build a company-size profile. Record market capitalization and its date or averaging period, revenue and fiscal period, and employee count and date.
- Match business maturity and scope. Compare commercial status, marketed products, pipeline and R&D, geographic reach and organizational complexity.
- Check the CEO roles. Account for role scope, tenure and any change in service during the year; flag unusual awards disclosed in the proxy.
- Separate pay components and measures. Compare salary, target and paid cash incentives, equity grant value and total compensation. Keep reported, realized and realizable values distinct.
- Read the company’s peer rationale. Use the proxy’s explanation of how peers were selected, when the group was reviewed and how the committee says it uses the data.
- Describe the fit, not just the result. State which dimensions are comparable and where the match is weak; attach dates and qualifications to each figure.
What the available disclosures can—and cannot—show
The cited proxy statements document how individual companies select peers and assess executive pay. They do not provide a harmonized median for biotech CEO compensation among companies in a defined size band. The peer ranges and percentile positions above are selection or comparison details, not pay statistics. A defensible dollar comparison therefore requires choosing a specific cohort, year and pay measure, then extracting the corresponding figures from each company’s proxy statements.
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.
