Market Trends Neutral 5

Pfizer & Bristol Myers: 2 Dirt-Cheap Pharma Stocks Yielding 6%+ for Healthcare Investors

Pfizer and Bristol Myers Squibb combine high dividend yields with deep healthcare pipelines, offering a compelling income-entry into a sector facing patent cliffs but also rich in innovation. For healthcare investors, the stocks demand a long-term view on drug development amid evolving policy risks.

· 4 min read · Verified by 2 sources ·
Share

Key Takeaways

  • Pfizer and Bristol Myers Squibb combine high dividend yields with deep healthcare pipelines, offering a compelling income-entry into a sector facing patent cliffs but also rich in innovation.
  • For healthcare investors, the stocks demand a long-term view on drug development amid evolving policy risks.

Mentioned

Pfizer company PFE Bristol Myers Squibb company Eliquis product Seagen company Karuna Therapeutics company RayzeBio company The Motley Fool company

Key Intelligence

Key Facts

  1. 1Pfizer became the first biopharmaceutical company to top $100 billion in annual revenue in 2022, driven by COVID-19 product sales.
  2. 2Eliquis, co-marketed by Pfizer and Bristol Myers Squibb, faces U.S. patent expiration around 2028, putting approximately $18 billion in combined annual sales at risk.
  3. 3Pfizer offers a forward dividend yield of approximately 6.5%, while Bristol Myers Squibb yields around 5.8%, both well above the S&P 500 average of 1.4%.
  4. 4Bristol Myers Squibb's Revlimid lost patent protection in 2022, contributing to a revenue decline from $46.2 billion in 2022 to an estimated $44 billion in 2025.
  5. 5Pfizer's acquisition of Seagen for $43 billion in 2023 provides a leading antibody-drug conjugate platform with peak sales potential exceeding $10 billion.
  6. 6Both companies generated ample free cash flow in 2025—Pfizer $12 billion and Bristol Myers $14 billion—comfortably covering annual dividend obligations of $9 billion and $5 billion respectively.
Metric
Dividend Yield (Forward) ~6.5% ~5.8%
P/E (Forward) 10.2 7.8
2025 Revenue $58B $44B
Key Loss of Exclusivity Eliquis (2028) Revlimid (2022), Eliquis (2028)
Pipeline Focus Oncology, I&I, Rare Disease Neuro, Radiopharma, Oncology

Who's Affected

Medicare Beneficiaries
population segmentNeutral
Healthcare Providers
organization groupPositive
Generic Drug Manufacturers
industry groupPositive
Drug Pricing Policy
regulatory domainNegative

Analysis

The pharmaceutical sector is at a crossroads: blockbuster drug franchises are about to lose exclusivity just as the Inflation Reduction Act introduces Medicare price negotiations. For healthcare systems, these trends foretell both cost savings and disruption to the innovation pipeline. Investors willing to look through the near-term noise may find that Pfizer and Bristol Myers Squibb—two giants trading at multi-year lows—offer not just income but a stake in the next wave of cell and gene therapies, ADCs, and precision medicines.

Pfizer (PFE) and Bristol Myers Squibb (BMY) have been relegated to the bargain bin of the pharmaceutical sector, trading at valuations rarely seen for companies of their size and historical earnings power. Once hailed as a $100 billion revenue giant in 2022 on the back of COVID-19 vaccine and antiviral sales, Pfizer has since faced a precipitous decline in pandemic-related revenue, dropping to approximately $58 billion in 2025. Bristol Myers Squibb, for its part, has navigated the steady erosion of exclusivity on top-selling drugs like Revlimid, with revenue contracting from $46.2 billion in 2022 to an estimated $44 billion in 2025. Both companies now offer dividend yields that tower above the S&P 500 average—Pfizer around 6.5% and Bristol Myers near 5.8% at current prices—making them the kind of dirt-cheap income plays that often attract contrarian investors.

Pfizer generated free cash flow of approximately $12 billion in 2025, more than enough to cover its $9 billion annual dividend obligation, while Bristol Myers’s $14 billion in free cash flow supports its $5 billion dividend.

The immediate bear case is well understood. Pfizer's anticoagulant blockbuster Eliquis, co-marketed with Bristol Myers, faces a key U.S. patent expiration around 2028, putting roughly $18 billion in combined annual revenue at risk. Meanwhile, Bristol Myers must contend with its own patent cliffs on Opdivo and other franchises, with an estimated $20 billion in revenue under threat through the end of the decade. Both companies are also navigating the Inflation Reduction Act's drug price negotiation provisions, which could further compress margins on top Medicare products. The market has priced these headwinds aggressively: Pfizer shares have fallen over 50% from their 2021 pandemic highs, while Bristol Myers trades at a forward P/E below 8, suggesting deep skepticism about their ability to offset looming revenue losses.

Yet both companies are pursuing aggressive pipeline-driven turnarounds that could reshape their revenue profiles by 2030. Pfizer plans to launch 19 new molecular entities or indications within the next 18 months, targeting oncology, inflammation and immunology, and rare diseases—areas where it has historically been underrepresented. The acquisition of Seagen for $43 billion in 2023 gave Pfizer a leading position in antibody-drug conjugates, a category expected to generate $10 billion-plus in peak sales. Bristol Myers has similarly rebuilt its pipeline through acquisitions of Karuna Therapeutics (neuropsychiatry) and RayzeBio (radiopharmaceuticals), with late-stage assets like KarXT for schizophrenia offering blockbuster potential. If even a third of these pipeline bets hit, the combined revenue could more than compensate for patent cliffs.

The dividend cover metrics provide some reassurance. Pfizer generated free cash flow of approximately $12 billion in 2025, more than enough to cover its $9 billion annual dividend obligation, while Bristol Myers’s $14 billion in free cash flow supports its $5 billion dividend. Both companies have signaled that dividends remain a capital allocation priority, even as they invest heavily in R&D and bolt-on acquisitions. For income-oriented investors with a three-to-five-year time horizon, the current entry point offers a rare combination of 6%+ yields and potential capital appreciation if pipeline execution gains credibility.

What to Watch

The macro environment further supports the thesis. With the Federal Reserve likely to hold rates steady or cut modestly through 2027, high-yield equities regain their appeal relative to fixed income. Institutional rotation from growth stocks into value and income names could provide a tailwind for beaten-down pharmaceutical stocks. As the market gradually prices in pipeline successes—starting with pivotal Phase III readouts for Pfizer’s atopic dermatitis candidate etrasimod and Bristol Myers’s schizophrenia drug—the valuation discount could narrow.

That said, the path is not without risk. Clinical trial failures remain a constant threat, and the loss of exclusivity timeline is inexorable. Should the pipeline falter, both companies could face dividend cuts and prolonged underperformance. Yet the asymmetry of the current setup—limited downside at single-digit earnings multiples against multiple shots on goal across high-value therapeutic areas—makes a compelling case for allocating at least a portion of a diversified portfolio. For those with $1,000 and an appetite for deep value income, splitting an investment between PFE and BMY today may prove to be a prescient decision by 2030.

Sources

Sources

Based on 2 source articles

Cite This Page

"Pfizer & Bristol Myers: 2 Dirt-Cheap Pharma Stocks Yielding 6%+ for Healthcare Investors." Healthcare Intelligence Brief, July 8, 2026. https://gethealthbrief.com/story/dirt-cheap-dividend-stocks-pfizer-bristol-myers-healthcare

How we covered this story

Every story in our healthcare coverage is assembled from multiple primary sources, cross-referenced for factual consistency, and scored along three independent dimensions: sentiment, operational impact, and source-cluster confidence. Single-source rumors and unverifiable claims do not pass our editorial gate. When a story shows "Verified by N sources" with N≥2, the development is independently corroborated; when N=1, we mark it explicitly so readers can weigh the signal accordingly.

Impact scoring uses a 1-10 scale weighted toward regulatory, financial, and operational consequence rather than coverage volume. A topic that runs in every outlet but moves no real decisions ranks lower than a niche regulatory filing that reshapes how operators in the healthcare space have to behave. Read our full methodology for the scoring rubric, our glossary for term definitions, and our trends index for the longitudinal view across the beat.

Sources are only linked to a story once they clear our classification pipeline at a minimum 35 percent relevance threshold. According to that methodology, reviewed July 2026, this follows multi-source corroboration standards recommended by journalism research bodies such as the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

See something wrong in this story — a wrong fact, a broken source link, a misattributed entity? Report a data issue.