Novartis is planning to buy U.S.-based biotech Excellergy for up to $2 billion, betting on a next-generation allergy treatment that may prove to work faster and better than anything currently on the market, the Swiss pharmaceutical giant said Friday.

The acquisition will add Exl-111, an early-stage drug candidate, to Novartis’ existing allergy portfolio. It is the latest bolt-on deal in the company’s attempt to offset looming patent expirations.

It comes just a week after Novartis announced it is acquiring Synnovation subsidiary Pikavation Therapeutics for up to $3 billion to secure the rights to an experimental breast cancer drug. 

In February, the company completed the acquisition of Avidity Biosciences, adding three late-stage programs to its neuromuscular pipeline, with potential for several launches before 2030. 

Excellergy’s lead asset remains several years away from hitting the market. Novartis said it will pay the smaller biotech in both upfront and milestone payments, and the transaction is expected to close in the first half of 2026, subject to regulatory approvals.

Novartis stock traded sideways in morning trading in Zurich. Palo Alto-based Excellergy is privately held.

Many of the best-selling drugs in the world are facing a loss of exclusivity in key jurisdictions in what the sector calls “the patent cliff.” By the turn of the decade, companies risk losing hundreds of billions in revenue as branded drugs are exposed to generic competition.

Like the second half of 2025, early 2026 has seen a slew of M&A announcements from Big Pharma, including Merck announcing it has reached an agreement to buy Terns Pharmaceuticals for up to $6.7 billion earlier this week. Britain’s GSK and AstraZeneca are also among the companies that have announced several deals over the past months.

GSK’s global head of business development Chris Sheldon told CNBC late last year he is looking for acquisitions often in mid-stage development in the $1 billion to $2 billion range, where the biology is validated biology but the outcome of a drug candidate isn’t yet obvious. Like Novartis and AstraZeneca, GSK looks for so-called bolt-on deals that complement its portfolio and technology.

Novartis warned earlier this year that profits would decline in early 2026 as some of its best-selling drugs, including heart medicine Entresto face generic competition. Its second-best-selling medicine Cosentyx is expected to lose key exclusivities around 2029.

“For the first half of the year, we will have a tough prior year base with Entresto, Promacta and Tasigna generics having entered the U.S. market mid-2025,” said then-incoming CFO Mukul Mehta in a post-earnings call with analysts in February.

Novartis is seeing strong growth in other medicines such as cancer drug Kisqali and multiple sclerosis treatment Kesimpta, but still has to bulk up its pipeline to offset declines. 

CEO Vas Narasimhan has said that the company is in the middle of the biggest patent expiration wave in the company’s history.

“It’s $4 billion that we will absorb over the course of this year across the three medicines,” Narasimhan told CNCB in February.

Novo Nordisk was the first company to make a GLP-1 drug for weight loss and became Europe’s most valuable company.

But its troubles are stacking up and today the stock trades at just a quarter of what it did at its peak less than two years ago.

Pricing pressure, fierce competition, and pipeline setbacks have all hit the Danish drugmaker in recent months.

Despite being first to launch a GLP-1 drug for weight loss, Novo’s market share has eroded, and the company now only captures about 40% of the market, while rival Eli Lilly holds 60%, according to most estimates.

Novo is clear-eyed about the challenges it faces, especially around pricing. After the company pre-released its 2026 forecast earlier this month and predicted declining sales, CEO Mike Doustdar told CNBC: “People should expect that it goes down before it comes back up.”

He’s repeatedly said that new medicines, the Wegovy pill, and increased volumes will drive long-term growth.

These charts show the scale of the challenges Novo is facing.

Novo Nordisk is often referred to as a diabetes and obesity pure play. Its portfolio included six branded drugs with annual sales of at least $1 billion in 2025, fewer than comparable current and future rivals.

Eli Lilly boasts eight so-called blockbuster drugs, and its portfolio also includes oncology and gene therapies.

The combined sales of Ozempic and Wegovy, Novo’s two biggest drugs, amounted to about $32 billion, or about 67% of total sales, last year. Combined sales of Lilly’s two biggest drugs, Mounjaro and Zepbound, were about $37 billion, or about 56% of the company’s total sales over the same period.

Novo also sells insulin, including blockbusters Tresiba and NovoRapid, as well as some drugs for rare diseases like hemophilia, but none come close to bringing in what its GLP-1 drugs do.

Among large-cap pharma companies hoping to enter the market for weight loss drugs in the coming years, such as AstraZeneca, Roche, Amgen, and Pfizer, through its acquisition of Metsera, the number of blockbuster drugs was significantly higher.

Novo Nordisk has also come under pressure as prices for GLP-1 drugs are coming down in its most important market, the U.S.

The U.S. has accounted for more than half of Novo’s total sales since 2023, and falling prices there are weighing on both the company’s topline and profitability. Last year, Novo and Lilly reached a deal with the Trump administration to lower prices on their GLP-1 drugs on Medicare and Medicaid and offer the treatments directly to consumers at a discount.

“In 2026, Novo Nordisk will face pricing headwinds in an increasingly competitive market,” said CEO Mike Doustdar, as the company’s full-year earnings report was published earlier this month.

Novo stock is down 75% since peaking at just over 1,000 Danish kroner a share in mid-2024.

The stock is up a little over 10% over the last five years. That compares to Eli Lilly’s 400% rise and the European blue-chip index Stoxx 600‘s 55% gain over the same period.

Investors were last rattled on Monday when Novo reported disappointing results of a trial pitting its next-generation weight loss drug, CagriSema, against Eli Lilly’s tirzepatide, also known as Zepbound, sending the stock down over 16% on the day.

“Confidence in the share is at rock bottom,” said Jyske Bank analyst Henrik Hallengreen Laustsen on Tuesday.

Earlier this month, Novo Nordisk said it expected sales and profits to drop by between 5% and 13% in 2026. If that comes to be true, it would be the first time annual sales have declined since 2017, in local currencies.

Analysts surveyed by FactSet expect sales to come in about 8% lower in 2026 compared to 2025. Much of that is due to increasing competition from both Eli Lilly and compounding pharmacies that are selling copycat versions of Novo’s branded drugs for a lower price.

Longer term, other large-cap pharma companies are planning to enter the market, and are pitching investors more differentiated weight loss drugs to be able to secure a slice of the market share for themselves.

Novo is hoping CagriSema can beef up future sales, but after the latest trial results, analysts are increasingly doubting its commercial potential.

Novo said it is optimistic about the drug, and that further trials would assess its full weight-loss potential.

The Wegovy pill is another potential growth driver for Novo and had a strong launch. However, it remains to be seen how it will fare if Lilly launches its rival pill, expected to hit the market in the second quarter, and what effects lower prices might have on volumes.

British companies are seeking deeper trade ties with Europe, business groups told CNBC, as U.S. President Donald Trump unveiled a sweeping 15% tariff on all imports after the Supreme Court struck down previous levies.

New tariffs would mark a 50% increase on the level negotiated last year in a trade deal between the U.K. the U.S., making the country one of the worst hit, according to analysis from think tank Global Trade Alert.

While U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the administration “expects” to stand by trade deals, the U.K. government is reportedly in ongoing discussions with counterparts in America.

The seesawing uncertainty is increasingly forcing U.K. businesses to look to closer alignment with the European Union and European countries, as they hunt for predictable trade partnerships, groups which represent U.K. businesses told CNBC.

“There’s just no certainty or consistency and companies are very weary of this,” said William Bain, head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), which represents 50,000 businesses.

“They’re potentially looking at other options in terms of doing more trade with Europe or with the Indo-Pacific [region], where there seem to be less risk of fluctuations,” he told CNBC.

Trump’s announcement that there would be blanket tariffs on all imports to the U.S. over the weekend brought further headaches to Europe’s business sector, which had seen the longstanding global trading order torn up last year.

In April, the U.S. upended the status quo by imposing a range of tariffs on trading partners across the world.

The new tariffs have raised alarm in Europe, with governments asking for more clarity from the White House as to what the new policy means for their trade deals. The EU negotiated a 15% duty on most exports with the U.S. in 2025.

The “majority” of the U.K.-U.S. deals on car, steel and pharma tariffs were not expected to change but discussions were ongoing, the BBC reported, citing an official spokesperson of U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

U.S. trading partners offered a cautious welcome to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Friday to strike down large parts of President Donald Trump’s flagship trade policy on global tariffs — but global trade bodies warned of lingering uncertainty surrounding import levies.

The law that undergirds the import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” the majority ruled six to three in the long-awaited Supreme Court decision.

Hours after the ruling, Trump said he signed an executive order imposing a new 10% “global tariff”. The “Section 122” tariffs will take effect “almost immediately,” Trump said. At a White House press briefing Friday afternoon, Trump railed against the “deeply disappointing” 6-3 ruling.

Trump’s tariff regime impacted a swathe of countries from the U.K. to India and the European Union. Some governments, like Vietnam and Brazil are still in negotiations.

Taiwan, home to the the world’s leading contract chipmaker and producer of the most advanced semiconductors, said the 10% flat tariff rate would, according to an initial assessment, have a “limited impact” on its economy.

The island will continue to “closely monitor” developments and maintain close communication with the U.S. to understand the specific measures and respond in a timely manner, the Taiwanese cabinet said in a statement on Saturday.

French President Emmanuel Macron reportedly said the Supreme Court’s ruling proved the benefit of having an effective counterweight to power.

“It is not bad to have a Supreme Court and, therefore, the rule of law,” Reuters quoted him as saying at an event in Paris on Saturday.

A U.K. government spokesperson said the country would continue to work with the White House administration to understand how the ruling will affect tariffs for the U.K. and the rest of the world

“This is a matter for the U.S. to determine but we will continue to support U.K. businesses as further details are announced,” the spokesperson said.

“The U.K. enjoys the lowest reciprocal tariffs globally, and under any scenario we expect our privileged trading position with the U.S. to continue.” The U.K. agreed a wide-ranging trade deal with the U.S. in May last year, which imposed a broad 10% levy on many goods, but also included certain carve-outs on steel, aluminum, cars and pharmaceuticals.

The Supreme Court case focused mainly on reciprocal tariffs, and the ruling leaves much of the U.K.’s trade deal with the U.S. — including preferential sectoral tariffs on steel, pharmaceuticals and autos — unaffected.

However, the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) trade body said the U.S. Supreme Court decision adds to the ongoing uncertainty around levies.

William Bain, head of trade policy at the BCC, said the move “does little to clear the murky waters” for British businesses, warning that the President still has “other options at his disposal” to retain his current regime on steel and aluminum tariffs.  

“The court’s decision also raises questions on how U.S. importers can reclaim levies already paid and whether U.K. exporters can also receive a share of any rebate depending on commercial trading terms,” Bain said in a statement. “For the U.K., the priority remains bringing tariffs down wherever possible.”

Olof Gill, European Commission spokesperson for trade and economic security, said businesses on both sides of the Atlantic depend on “stability and predictability.”

“We remain in close contact with the U.S. Administration as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling,” Gill said. “We therefore continue to advocate for low tariffs and to work towards reducing them.”

Meanwhile, Dominic LeBlanc, Canada’s minister for U.S.-Canadian trade relations, said the decision “reinforces Canada’s position that the IEEPA tariffs imposed by the United States are unjustified.”