Collects human plasma through its own centers and fractionates it into immune-therapy biologics, earning mainly from one-time product sales to hospitals and distributors rather than from the plasma collection itself.
- Depends onUpstream position: supplies 6 industries, depends on 3
- ScaleMarket cap is $2.18B, above the global median of $1.18B
- PositionReturn on equity is 41.9%, higher than 95% of its Biotechnology peers (median -23.6%)
- Interpretations7 currently firing — 7
What this company is and how it runs — written from structure, not news.
It sits between plasma donors and third-party plasma suppliers on one side and specialty distributors, hospitals, physician offices and clinics treating immunocompromised patients on the other, coordinating collection, manufacturing, marketing, logistics and order fulfillment between them.
It earns most of its revenue from one-time product sales, paid after delivery within a set window, with a much smaller share from contract manufacturing and laboratory services, sales of intermediate plasma fractions, and licensing one product to an outside partner. Revenue and the receivables owed to it have both grown in each of the last several years, consistent with a business extending more of its own credit terms as it grows rather than collecting entirely upfront.
Its return and margin measures sit in the upper range among companies whose products must clear a regulatory approval step before they can be sold, and it has grown revenue and operating income every year over several consecutive years. Capital spending has run well ahead of depreciation, a configuration CompanyGraph associates with a still-expanding or young asset base, though the same pattern can also reflect an asset-light business or a depreciation policy that understates real wear. By its own account, growth depends on expanding plasma collection, manufacturing capacity and staffing, with each expansion needing its own regulatory sign-off rather than being demand-led alone, and its bottom-line result has not moved in lockstep with that operating growth every year.
It relies on third-party plasma suppliers and counterparties named in its own filings, including Grifols Worldwide Operations, KEDPlasma and Biotest Pharmaceuticals, and on outside contractors for filling, packaging, labeling and testing, rather than performing every step itself. Notably, the name Grifols appears in the same filings both among these supply counterparties and among the competitors it names elsewhere, so at least one input relationship runs through a company that also appears on its competitor list. It also depends on a continuing supply of regulator-approved plasma from paid donors, on regulatory licensing to keep its plants and collection centers operating, and on its Boca facility, which it has said has no alternative or replacement arrangement if lost. CompanyGraph separately maps it as sitting downstream of a small number of industries that feed its inputs.
A small number of named distributors, including BioCare and CuraScript SD Specialty Distribution, fulfill most of its orders to hospitals, physician offices, clinics and specialty treatment centers. Biotest AG separately holds the exclusive right to market and sell its ASCENIV product across Europe and specified countries in Northern Africa and the Middle East. Because those buyers in turn serve immunocompromised patients with an ongoing therapeutic need, concentration sits at the distributor layer even though the underlying need originates with patients.
By its own account, it is one of a small number of producers of plasma-derived products in the United States, naming CSL Behring, Grifols and Takeda alongside itself, which describes a concentrated market rather than one with many competing producers. The company also describes its donor-selection criteria, formulation methods and testing standards as proprietary, though whether those specific methods are actually difficult for its named competitors to replicate is not something CompanyGraph can measure. Set against the wider population of companies whose products must clear a regulatory approval step before they can be sold, this business sits within a much larger peer group at that broader level, so the scarcity is a feature of the plasma-products market specifically, not of its broader regulatory category.
The general pattern for this kind of business is that revenue depends on clearing a long, binary regulatory approval step before it can be earned at all. This company's own account describes a related but distinct limit for its already-approved products: growth requires expanding plasma collection, manufacturing capacity, staffing and systems, and each of those expansions itself needs regulatory sign-off, so the constraint sits on approval for added capacity rather than on winning first approval. It also states that it does not currently see itself as limited by demand or by supply, while warning it could become supply-limited if it cannot keep obtaining enough regulator-approved plasma and other raw material.
By its own account, several single points of exposure sit close together: its Boca facility, for which it says there is no alternative or replacement arrangement if lost to a casualty event; dependence on outside parties for filling, packaging, testing and labeling that it does not control directly; reliance on a small number of customers that account for a concentrated share of its business; and a continued supply of regulator-approved plasma. It names sustaining profitability and positive cash flow, and passing ongoing regulatory inspection, among the pressures it lists first, which suggests these are the risks it treats as most immediate to its own operation.
Its own filings name the FDA, through the agency's biologics review center, as the regulator governing its products, manufacturing facility and plasma centers, operating under a federal biologics license, with a South Korean regulator also named in connection with its filings. It lists passing regulatory inspection and sustaining profitability and positive cash flow among the pressures it flags first, alongside the risk that outside parties it depends on for filling, packaging, testing and labeling do not perform as needed. More broadly, this sits in a category of business where a product earns nothing until it clears a regulatory approval step, a general feature of that category rather than something separately measured about this company's own pipeline.
Read from the company's own filings and public materials (gathered August 2026) together with figures CompanyGraph recomputed from its statements. Written September 2026. A question with no evidence behind it is left out rather than answered.
Sign in to view price data.
Sign inThe reported statements, read against the company's own industry.
7 interpretations currently present — each is a set of fired observations whose alignment reads as one structural pattern. Click an observation to see the numbers behind it.
Screen for these patternsHow does this company use capital?
Elevated EBITDA Margin With Small D&A Gap and Capex Above Depreciation
EBITDA margin reads high with little depreciation charged, and capex above that charge.
Three Asset-Base Ratios Elevated
It gets more sales from its assets than its industry does, and a lot of profit from them too.
Industry-Benchmarked Return on Capital Elevated
It earns more on its assets and its equity than its industry, and gets more sales from those assets.
Operating Income Growing With Multi-Year Revenue Growth
Revenue up in each of five years, with operating income up in each of four.
Revenue Growing With Receivables Growing
Revenue has risen three years, and what customers owe has risen with it.
ROE, ROA, And Operating ROA Elevated
It earns more on its equity than its industry does, and on its assets too — not on borrowing alone.
Is this company growing?
Revenue Growth With Elevated Margin
Revenue up in each of five years, while its operating margin stays high.
An interpretation is present only while every observation it reads stays fired (score ≥ 70). It describes what the aligned readings show — never a verdict, never a prediction.
Shared structure with peers — never a ranking.
Structural observations derived from financial data, industry benchmarks, and supply chain position.
Peer Positioning
Financial Health
Supply Chain
Scale
Companies that share the same coordination system — how they create, deliver, or capture value.
Companies that share active interpretations — structural patterns currently present in both stocks.