This working paper quantifies how concentrated pharmaceutical revenues have become among the five largest U.S.-listed drug manufacturers—AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, and Pfizer. Using public segment disclosures from 2022–2024, the study applies conventional concentration metrics (CR3, CR5, HHI) and introduces interval-bounded estimates to account for the opacity of aggregated "Other" revenue categories.
By treating undisclosed revenue segments as synthetic products, the approach yields upper and lower bounds for concentration that reflect both reporting heterogeneity and genuine economic exposure. Differences in disclosure practice alone can change perceived concentration risk by double-digit percentages — an important consideration for valuation, antitrust analysis, and portfolio risk assessment.
1. Introduction
Product concentration risk is the degree to which a firm’s revenue relies on a small fraction of their products portfolio. This reliance creates a risk for firms as a relatively small change in the cash flows from a product they are concentrated in has an outsized effect on the firm as a whole. The greater the proportion of revenues attributable to top-selling products, the greater the product concentration risk. In the pharmaceutical industry, shocks to these product revenues typically involve patent cliffs, safety concerns, and competitive entries.
This report describes the product concentration in the pharmaceutical divisions of the five largest U.S.-listed pharmaceutical companies by annual revenue as of 2024 using segmented revenues from their annual reports. Product concentrations are measured using three standard measures: CR3, CR5, and an extension of the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI). Due to variations in revenue disclosure transparency, interval estimates are provided for each.
2. Methods
2.1 Data
Itemized product revenues were sourced from annual reports published on the company websites of the firms we chose to study. Each company under study published segmented revenue sources in the notes to the financial statements for 2024 and the two years prior. The granularity of revenue segmentation varied between companies.
A portion of revenues were attributed to aggregated items for every company in our study. The components of these aggregated items were generally not listed in the footnotes; instead, a generic description was provided. The proportion of revenues from named products and product families as compared to those in aggregated items showed significant variation between firms.
Among these aggregated items:
- Some companies’ reporting decomposed aggregated revenues into subcategories of pharmaceutical revenue to which they were attributable (e.g., “All other Oncology”).
- Others did not (e.g., “Other Pharmaceutical”).
In accordance with accounting norms, annual reports for FY 2024 included retrospective application of that year’s segmentation for the two previous years’ data.
2.2 Definitions
We define product shares using reported product-level revenues within each firm’s pharmaceutical division with total division revenue. Concentrations are defined, by convention, as:
[
\text{Concentration Ratio} = \frac{\text{Revenue of Top k Products}}{\text{Total Division Revenue}}
]
We report interval estimates for all product concentration measures.
The distribution of product shares within aggregated categories was not disclosed by any company and is impossible to backform in the absence of other information.
Unlike CR3 and CR5, HHI is distribution-sensitive with a change in any component affecting the index. Resultantly, we cannot drop aggregated categories entirely without distorting the measure.
- HHI Upper Bound: includes each aggregated item as a single synthetic product
- HHI Lower Bound: partitions aggregated items into synthetic products, each smaller than the smallest reported product share in that category (if applicable)
2.3 Rationale
We intentionally avoid reporting a normalized HHI, which would entail rescaling the index to reduce the effect of the total number of items in favor of quantifying relative scale.
In pharmaceutical product concentration:
- The number of unique products
- The opacity of aggregated items
…illuminate the concentration risks the company faces.
Calculating upper and lower bounds for HHI via disaggregation of roll-up items is more informative to the theoretical best- and worst-case scenarios underlying the reported data. This approach preserves information about product count and concentration for reported line items.
3. Results
Table 1. Product Concentration Ratios (High vs Low Estimates)
Year | Firm | CR3 (High) | CR5 (High) | HHI (High) | CR3 (Low) | CR5 (Low) | HHI* (Low) |
---|
2024 | JNJ | 0.4609 | 0.5786 | 1004 | 0.4609 | 0.5786 | 994 |
2024 | MRK | 0.7069 | 0.7809 | 2939 | 0.7064 | 0.7604 | 2920 |
2024 | BMY | 0.5882 | 0.7378 | 1464 | 0.5882 | 0.7378 | 1449 |
2024 | PFE | 0.3124 | 0.4855 | 647 | 0.3124 | 0.4855 | 576 |
2024 | ABBV | 0.4736 | 0.5913 | 1010 | 0.4736 | 0.5913 | 976 |
2023 | JNJ | 0.4514 | 0.5685 | 964 | 0.4514 | 0.5685 | 953 |
2023 | MRK | 0.6784 | 0.7630 | 2563 | 0.6784 | 0.7538 | 2545 |
2023 | BMY | 0.6069 | 0.7633 | 1512 | 0.6069 | 0.7633 | 1500 |
2023 | PFE | 0.4201 | 0.5793 | 861 | 0.4201 | 0.5588 | 776 |
2023 | ABBV | 0.4812 | 0.6032 | 1171 | 0.4812 | 0.6024 | 1132 |
2022 | JNJ | 0.4155 | 0.5382 | 869 | 0.4155 | 0.5382 | 850 |
2022 | MRK | 0.6445 | 0.7459 | 2025 | 0.6445 | 0.7417 | 2003 |
2022 | BMY | 0.6503 | 0.8011 | 1615 | 0.6503 | 0.8011 | 1603 |
2022 | PFE | 0.6333 | 0.7481 | 1955 | 0.6333 | 0.7481 | 1923 |
2022 | ABBV | 0.5335 | 0.6516 | 1649 | 0.5335 | 0.6253 | 1594 |
HHI denotes the lower-bound estimate.
- Figure 1. CR3 and CR5 for Segmented Pharmaceutical Product Concentrations
- Figure 2. Herfindahl–Hirschman Index for Segmented Pharmaceutical Product Concentrations
Highlighted are the uninformative items from the segmented revenues included in the notes to the financial statements.
Three of the five largest pharmaceutical firms have aggregated product categories listed in the top five of their pharmaceutical revenues when sorted by annual revenue. Financial reporting regulations dictate minimum disclosure standards.
5. Discussion
(Draft section — not yet filled in)
Appendix
Table 2. Leading Reported Product Categories
Johnson & Johnson
Rank | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
---|
1 | Stelara | Stelara | Darzalex |
2 | Darzalex | Darzalex | Stelara |
3 | Invega Sustenna… | Invega Sustenna… | Invega Sustenna… |
4 | Imbruvica | Imbruvica | Tremfya |
5 | Tremfya | Tremfya | Imbruvica |
Merck & Co.
Rank | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
---|
1 | Keytruda | Keytruda | Keytruda |
2 | Gardasil/Gardasil 9 | Gardasil/Gardasil 9 | Gardasil/Gardasil 9 |
3 | Lagevrio | ProQuad/M-M-R II… | Other pharmaceutical |
4 | Januvia | Other pharmaceutical | ProQuad/M-M-R II… |
5 | Other pharmaceutical | Januvia | Bridion |
Bristol Myers Squibb
Rank | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
---|
1 | Eliquis | Eliquis | Eliquis |
2 | Revlimid | Opdivo | Opdivo |
3 | Opdivo | Revlimid | Revlimid |
4 | Pomalyst/Imnovid | Orencia | Orencia |
5 | Orencia | Pomalyst/Imnovid | Pomalyst/Imnovid |
Pfizer
Rank | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
---|
1 | Comirnaty | Comirnaty | Eliquis |
2 | Paxlovid | Eliquis | Prevnar family |
3 | Eliquis | Prevnar family | Paxlovid |
4 | Prevnar family | Ibrance | Vyndaqel family |
5 | Ibrance | All other Hospital | Comirnaty |
AbbVie
Rank | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
---|
1 | Humira | Humira | Skyrizi |
2 | Skyrizi | Skyrizi | Humira |
3 | Imbruvica | Rinvoq | Rinvoq |
4 | All other | Imbruvica | Imbruvica |
5 | Botox Therapeutic | All other | Botox Therapeutic |
Citations
- 17 CFR § 210.5-03
- Interval Estimation of the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index under Incomplete Market Information (ResearchGate)
Draft: October 2025