ESTEVE has successfully reshaped itself in the recent years as an integrated healthcare company with two distinct growth engines: highly specialised pharmaceuticals and a global small-molecule CDMO platform, united by a shared purpose, long-term vision and a commitment to improving patients’ lives. As the US grows in relevance and investment plans, CEO and Board Member Staffan Schüberg discusses the strategy behind this evolution, the balance between scale and specialisation, and pressures on pricing, patient access and Europe’s ability to sustain pharmaceutical innovation.
How has ESTEVE evolved since 2018, and what have been the defining elements of its transformation?
By 2018, it was clear to the board, management and shareholders that we had two areas of real strength on which we wanted to build: our pharmaceutical business and our API manufacturing business. Both had strong growth potential, but both needed further investment, so over the past eight years we have focused on developing these two areas while divesting non-core activities. On the Pharma side, we have built a more international, highly specialised portfolio focused largely on severe, low-prevalence and rare conditions. We have expanded through acquisitions such as Riemser and HRA Rare Diseases, as well as through our growth in the United States, which is now our second-biggest pharma affiliate.
Our second growth engine is our CDMO business, focused on small-molecule API development and manufacturing. Following the acquisition of Regis Technologies in 2025, we now have a global manufacturing footprint across Spain, China, Mexico and the United States, supporting customers from very early development, including pre-Phase I, through to commercial manufacturing. The balance between the two businesses naturally shifts because they have different growth trajectories. CDMO was significantly bigger last year, but by 2027 we expect the two to be roughly 50/50, with Pharma potentially slightly bigger. We are not managing ESTEVE towards a particular split, however. Our objective is to grow both businesses as much as possible.
CDMO offers somewhat more predictable growth because we have the factories and reactors and continue adding new molecules, while Pharma follows more of a stepwise trajectory, where a the product is ready for launch can create a significant increase that we then build on until the next opportunity comes along. Having both gives us a good balance between the more stable CDMO business and the higher-risk, higher-reward profile of highly specialised pharma, and our shareholders value that dual-engine model. We see both businesses as integral to ESTEVE, with their own growth agendas but a shared role within the broader organisation, and there is no intention to spin off either one. Together, they make up Esteve Healthcare
Where does ESTEVE see the strongest opportunities for growth as it continues to expand its pharmaceutical and CDMO businesses?
Our growth strategy is built around one integrated healthcare company rather than a portfolio of separate businesses, so the opportunities we pursue need to fit within ESTEVE and allow us to use our capabilities across the organisation. On the pharmaceutical side, we see particularly strong potential in highly specialised products, often in orphan and rare diseases or areas requiring specialised distribution and a high level of engagement. These tend to involve relatively few prescribers and patients, often with significant unmet needs, which fits our footprint, expertise and capabilities particularly well. What has been somewhat surprising over the past five years is how quickly the United States has grown in importance for us. It is now our second-biggest affiliate and could become the biggest in the not-too-distant future, reflecting the greater availability of the highly specialised opportunities we are looking for in the US.
That development has been partly by design and partly a result of the opportunities that have arisen, but underlying it has been a very conscious need to grow ESTEVE. When we spoke in 2022, we set an ambition of reaching EUR one billion in revenues with profitability of around 25 percent, and we expect to reach that level next year. Size matters in pharmaceuticals because, if we want to take the risks involved in late-stage development -e.g. early Phase III opportunities-, we need sufficient capital to sustain potential failures and continue moving forward. Sustainable growth and value creation have been guiding principles for us, although it has to be selective and fit our strategy. The US has simply offered more of those opportunities in recent years, but we remain equally interested in opportunities in Europe.
Our CDMO business is growing in parallel through our global platform spanning China, Europe, the United States and Mexico, where we focus exclusively on small-molecule APIs, supporting customers from early development through to commercial manufacturing. Unlike many CDMOs working with high-volume generics, we tend to handle smaller volumes. Our customers increasingly value not only capacity, but also scientific expertise, reliability and the assurance of having a reliable supply of product throughout its lifecycle.
We also support customers across several molecules, which allows us to become a strategic partner rather than simply a manufacturer. For a product addressing a high unmet need, the most expensive thing that can happen is not having the product available when it is needed, and reliability is therefore critical. We have never failed an inspection and have always delivered to our customers, and that is the track record we want to maintain.
What is driving ESTEVE’s growing presence in the US, and how does this fit alongside its European base?
The US has grown considerably in importance for us, largely through acquisitions and because we are finding more of the highly specialised opportunities we are looking for in that market. As that presence grows, however, we also have to consider how the US pricing environment is evolving and what that could mean for our portfolio. Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) pricing is something we are debating a lot, as is the rest of the pharmaceutical industry, although there are still many moving pieces around how it will ultimately be implemented. The US has also expanded protections for orphan medicines under the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, and how those protections will interact with the broader MFN framework is still evolving. As things stand today the immediate impact on ESTEVE is limited.
Our growing presence in the US does not come at the expense of Europe. We have expanded there largely through acquisitions, and the US business we have today is profitable on its own and contributes to our broader global strategy. We would like it to become even bigger and more profitable because, in pharmaceuticals, there is a certain minimum scale you need to support regulatory, quality and compliance functions regardless of the size of the business. The larger we become, the more effectively we can use that infrastructure and capture synergies across the organisation. From the beginning, we have therefore built our pharmaceutical business around global functions with pharmacovigilance, regulatory, quality, SAP and other core systems operating on global platforms and supporting both Europe and the United States. As our US presence grows, those systems will naturally need to adapt to the particularities of the market, but the underlying principle remains to have a solid global infrastructure that allows us to add new geographies efficiently.
Barcelona remains an important part of that global infrastructure, and the evolution of its life-sciences ecosystem over the past decade has supported our growth. We can see that in two very practical ways. It is now considerably easier to recruit specialised pharmaceutical talent in and around the city, while there is also much more capital available from investors with a strong understanding of the pharmaceutical industry. Both have changed noticeably compared with ten years ago, strengthening Barcelona’s position as a life-sciences hub and, in turn, the European base from which we support our international growth.
How could the changing US pricing environment influence market access and the broader pharmaceutical landscape in Europe?
I think the changes we are now seeing in the US will have significant ramifications for Europe, and all stakeholders will have to decide how we operate in this new environment. Historically, pricing in the US has been rewarding innovation higher than in Europe, but with MFN pricing, tariffs and other changes taking place, I think we will have to look at the European market differently. There needs to be a serious dialogue with pricing and reimbursement authorities about how we make this work, because Europe cannot continue focusing on securing the lowest possible prices for pharmaceutical products, particularly if US prices become increasingly linked to those in other markets.
The new EU pharmaceutical legislation is also moving towards more timely and equitable access to medicines across Member States, and we need to find a balance between that ambition and a pricing environment that makes launching innovative medicines sustainable. We cannot expect full access for all European citizens while being unwilling to pay for that innovation. I therefore think the European landscape will have to change significantly over the next five years, because the current price differentiation between the US and Europe cannot continue indefinitely, nor can the US carry a greater share of the burden of global R&D.
European systems are collective and naturally place greater emphasis on controlling costs, while in the US individuals and families can choose different levels of coverage depending on what they are willing to pay. That creates greater complexity and bureaucracy, but it also allows for different levels of access, whereas Europe tends to be more binary: you are either in or you are out, with very little in between. Coming to terms with that difference will be politically difficult, and I understand why many European politicians would rather not address it, but it is a real issue that Europe will have to confront.
Why has ESTEVE increasingly focused on rare and highly specialised diseases, and how does this shape its approach to investment?
Our focus on highly specialised solutions, including some orphan and rare diseases, is very deliberate because these products fit particularly well with our size, capabilities and expertise. We do not have the scale to build our strategy around blockbuster products that can involve lengthy pricing and reimbursement processes across major European markets. In this segment the unmet need is often very high, while the overall cost to society is relatively limited because the patient populations are small, which can provide a faster route to access. Ultimately, our focus on highly specialised medicines reflects our belief that we can create the greatest value where unmet medical needs remain particularly high.
Looking ahead, our priority is continued growth. We have invested around EUR one billion since 2020 across new CDMO technologies, companies and products, and we expect to invest another EUR one billion over the next three to five years. We are not earmarking that investment for Pharma, CDMO or specific therapeutic areas, but instead looking broadly for the best opportunities available at any given time, whether that means adding capacity in the United States or Asia, acquiring a company or bringing new products into the portfolio. There is an opportunistic element to that approach, but every investment has to fit our strategic agenda and add something we do not already have. These investments are not driven by scale alone. They are part of a long-term strategy focused on strengthening capabilities, expanding our global footprint and building sustainable platforms for future growth.
What has the introduction of an external investor brought to ESTEVE’s ownership model, culture and strategic direction?
Lubea is a private investment firm, but it is ultimately owned by a major family office, bringing a longer-term perspective than you wouldn’t typically associate with private equity. Its involvement has added financial and professional expertise complementing the strengths of family ownership. A family brings a culture and legacy that it wants to preserve and carry forward, while the financial expertise adds discipline and, in our case, has brought greater clarity to the overall strategic direction for the owners, board and management. Importantly, we have also maintained a clear balance of responsibilities: management moves the business forward and brings strategic alternatives to the board and owners, rather than having investors involved in the day-to-day running of the company. It has been a productive relationship, and we are very much on the same page.
I think there is a strong symbiosis between those elements, and together they give us something very valuable. Europe has a rich tradition of family-owned pharmaceutical businesses, with Spain, Italy and Germany providing good examples, and there is real value in the history and identity that come with that. When I speak about ESTEVE to someone in Barcelona or Madrid, they immediately know the name and feel that it is part of their country and culture. There is a particular value in having been around for 100 years and having stood the test of time, while continuing to evolve and build the business for the future.
Looking ahead, what needs to change for Europe to remain a leading pharmaceutical innovation hub, and where does ESTEVE see its place in that future?
Europe has a tremendous opportunity, particularly with the changes taking place globally, to preserve the important role it has historically played, and continues to play, in pharmaceutical innovation. We should not let that slip out of our hands, especially when China is more than ready to take on a greater role. Europe already has the infrastructure, universities, know-how and people, so we should capitalise on those strengths, but that also requires some adjustments. Innovation needs to be rewarded, and we need to find a financially acceptable way for all parties to ensure that European patients have access to innovative medicines. I am not suggesting that I have the solution, but we need to address the issue directly, because a system in which countries compete with one another simply to pay the lowest price is not going to work.
For ESTEVE, I would like us to be seen internationally as an ambitious company, reflecting both how far we have come and where we intend to go next. We have doubled in size and more than quadrupled our profit, and we intend to continue growing significantly over the next five years.
Our ambition is to be recognised globally as one of the most trusted and respected specialised healthcare companies, combining pharmaceutical expertise with world-class CDMO capabilities. We want to continue growing, but above all we want to create lasting value for patients, customers, employees and society. That is what defines ESTEVE and what will continue guiding us into the future. Ultimately, that is what defines ESTEVE and what will continue guiding our decisions and ambitions for the years to come.
