Other Deals Are Up 1500% in 2026 — Here's the Data

96 deals in six months — up from just 6 in the prior half-year. That's a 1500% surge in "other" modality deal activity between the September 2025–March 2026 period and the March–August 2026 window, and it represents the single most dramatic category shift we've tracked this year. The driver isn't noise — it's a deliberate strategic pivot by large-cap pharma toward modalities and platform technologies that don't fit neatly into the small molecule, antibody, or cell/gene therapy buckets that have dominated licensing for the past decade.

The Data — Other Deal Activity, Period over Period

This isn't a rounding error or a data artifact. The baseline of 6 deals was itself consistent with prior periods — "other" modalities were a backwater. The explosion to 96 deals in H1 2026 reflects real capital reallocation and a broadening of what pharma BD teams consider in-licensable. Check these figures against current Deal Benchmarks to see how valuations in this category compare to traditional modalities.

What's Driving the Trend

Pipeline exhaustion in conventional modalities is the root cause. The major oncology and immunology antibody targets are saturated. GLP-1 portfolios are largely locked up. Cell and gene therapy manufacturing economics remain brutal. Large pharma companies — particularly those with patent cliffs in 2027–2029 — are being forced to look beyond familiar modality categories. "Other" is no longer a catch-all for oddities; it's where radiopharmaceuticals, microbiome therapeutics, synthetic biology platforms, protein degraders that defy PROTAC classification, and novel delivery systems live. The category's heterogeneity is precisely the point: BD teams are casting wider nets because the traditional fishing grounds are depleted.

Regulatory tailwinds matter here too. The FDA's 2025 guidance updates on combination products and platform-based submissions lowered the perceived risk of non-traditional modalities. Several "other" category assets received breakthrough or fast-track designations in Q1–Q2 2026, which acts as a de-risking signal that accelerates deal velocity. When regulators signal comfort with novel approaches, pharma BD teams get internal buy-in faster.

Capital availability is the accelerant. Biotech funding recovered meaningfully in late 2025, giving small-cap innovators in non-traditional modalities enough runway to generate the Phase 1/2 data packages that make them licensable. Six months ago, many of these companies were pre-clinical or underfunded. The funding cycle created a bolus of deal-ready assets that hit the market simultaneously in H1 2026.

Notable Deals

The AstraZeneca–CSPC deal is the headline: $1.2B upfront with an $18.5B total deal value — a structure that screams conviction, not optionality. AstraZeneca executed two deals with CSPC within three days, suggesting a platform-level bet rather than a single-asset in-license. When a top-5 pharma company writes a check this large outside traditional modality categories, it resets valuation expectations for the entire space. Use the Ambrosia calculator to see where this deal sits relative to upfront-to-TDV ratios across modalities.

Novo Nordisk's $2.4B TDV deal with Omeros signals that the GLP-1 giant is diversifying beyond metabolic disease and peptide therapeutics — a strategic imperative given the inevitable competitive pressure on its core franchise. BridgeBio's $105M upfront from Novartis, while smaller in absolute terms, represents strong validation for a company that has built its model around genetically-driven rare disease platforms that often fall into non-traditional modality classifications.

The Amgen–BeiGene deal, while lacking disclosed financial terms, matters for geographic strategy. Cross-border deals involving Chinese biotechs in non-traditional modalities have increased sharply, consistent with a broader trend of ex-China licensing for novel platforms that were historically considered too risky for Western pharma portfolios.

What This Means for BD Teams Right Now

If you're a seller in this category, you have leverage you didn't have nine months ago — use it before the window narrows. The AstraZeneca–CSPC upfront of $1.2B has reset anchor pricing. Licensors with Phase 2 data in non-traditional modalities should be pushing for upfront payments in the $75M–$200M range for assets that would have commanded $20M–$50M in 2025. The deal velocity data supports aggressive timelines: multiple potential licensees are competing for assets in this space, which means exclusivity windows in term sheets should be shortened.

For buyers, the message is move now but structure carefully. The 1500% surge means the market is heating fast, and waiting another quarter will cost you. However, the heterogeneity of the "other" category creates real diligence risk — not every asset in this bucket is equivalent. The smartest deal structures right now are milestone-heavy with meaningful upfronts (6–10% of TDV) and robust opt-out provisions tied to clinical endpoints. Back-loaded TDVs exceeding $5B are becoming common, but smart buyers are ensuring those milestones are genuinely risk-adjusted rather than aspirational.

Deal structures are shifting toward platform deals over single-asset licenses. The dual AstraZeneca–CSPC transactions within 72 hours exemplify this. BD teams evaluating non-traditional modality companies should be thinking about multi-asset frameworks, co-development rights, and manufacturing partnerships rather than clean out-licenses. If your deal term sheet looks the same as it did for a small molecule in-license in 2023, you're behind.

Benchmark your deal against current market rates using the Ambrosia calculator — particularly if you're negotiating upfront-to-TDV ratios in a category where historical comps are thin.

Frequently Asked Questions

What exactly falls into the "other" deal category, and why is it surging?

The "other" category captures modalities that don't fit standard classifications: radiopharmaceuticals, microbiome therapeutics, synthetic biology platforms, novel delivery technologies, combination products, and non-traditional protein degraders. The 1500% surge from 6 to 96 deals reflects pharma's strategic diversification away from saturated antibody and small molecule pipelines. This isn't a data classification artifact — it represents a genuine broadening of what Big Pharma BD teams consider licensable assets.

Is the AstraZeneca–CSPC $18.5B TDV an outlier or a new benchmark for other licensing 2026?

It's a benchmark-setter, not an outlier. AstraZeneca's willingness to commit $1.2B upfront — roughly 6.5% of the $18.5B TDV — establishes a new reference point for platform-scale deals in non-traditional modalities. The fact that AZ executed a second CSPC deal three days later at $1.77B TDV reinforces that this was a deliberate strategic allocation, not a one-off. Licensors with comparable platform breadth should be using this deal as their primary comp in negotiations.

How should BD teams adjust valuation models for other deal trends 2026?

Traditional DCF models built on established modality precedents undervalue assets in this category. BD teams should be incorporating a scarcity premium of 15–25% above conventional modality comps, reflecting the competitive intensity we're seeing. Upfront payments have moved from the $20M–$50M range to $75M–$200M for Phase 2 assets in the first half of 2026. Review current benchmarks on the Deal Benchmarks page and run scenario analyses using Solidus to stress-test your term structures against this new pricing environment.