Okay. All right. Welcome back to day two of the 2026 Wells Fargo Healthcare Conference. I'm Larry Biegelsen, a M edT ech Analyst, and it's my pleasure to host this fireside chat with the management from Dexcom. With us, we have Jereme Sylvain, the CFO, and Joe Deltorchio from Investor Relations. It's fireside chat. Jereme, thanks so much for being here.
Thanks for having me. Good to be back.
Jereme, let's start with everyone's favorite topic, type 2 non-insulin.
Okay.
You presented the CONNECT data at ADA. Really good results. What's the status of the publication?
Yeah. Thanks for bringing up CONNECT. We will file multiple different things over the course of time with CONNECT. We are doing follow-up studies as well. As you mentioned, great results. Really, really happy with it. We expect it to be published in a major journal. One of the things you cannot do is say the timing or the name of the journal if you want it to be published in there. We are actively working on it, and so would expect it to be published here in a relatively short period. Timing-wise, sometimes you have to kind of time it with the timing of the journal, so we are working closely there, but would expect it to be in a major journal and look forward to sharing even more of the results.
I think once you go through, we shared a bunch of the results earlier this year at ADA. You will obviously see all of those in there, but there will be some more additional results in the details that I think you will find very compelling. There is more to come over time with follow-up studies. You will continue to see more and more data coming out around this study, but really, really happy with what we saw so far.
Sounds like it has been at least accepted in a major journal.
Can't comment on it. What I would say is we expect it to be published in a major journal. Can't comment on timing or their process, out of respect for their process.
Okay. Any update on the CMS timing? Do you still expect a proposal by year-end? Yeah. What's your visibility on that?
Yeah. We're still in that same window timing. There's a lot of back and forth that continues to go on, has and continues to go on. Still feel very confident in the timing that we released and still would expect it over that period. As you know, in our LRP, we have it starting about six months after the end of this year, so kind of midpoint of next year is our assumption. Those all still ring true and things that we're actively working to and, quite frankly, building our org capability, capacity, sales force, et c., really all around those same time frames.
Why is there back and forth? I mean, at this point, what are the questions? Investors are asking about A1C threshold, step therapy, having to be on meds, for example. What's your view on that? Again, this process has been going on, it seems like, for a long time. We remember your comments from this conference last year. Why the back and forth?
Yeah. Submissions historically have taken 18 months on average. If you kind of look back, this isn't specific to CGM, this is over multiples, and these are large expansions. As we talked about last year, we filed early last year, not this year, last year, as did our competitor. It's been in front of CMS for some time. These typically take a lot of time. These are big decisions. This is a large population. Certainly, the information is really important. Certainly, you can probably imagine the amount of advocacy that takes place over these windows is also important. Some of that just takes time. These are big decisions that once those decisions are made, it's very difficult to reverse those. We understand it's a really big decision for the administration.
At the same time, I think we've shown them an incredible amount of compelling evidence, even prior to the CONNECT trial. But having amending our. Not have a phone. I'll pull it out of my pocket just in case. Hopefully, everybody can hear back there? Good.
Audio okay in the back?
Time for advocacy. When you look at the two submissions that have been made to date, and there's been a Freedom of Information Act filing out there, so you can see what they are. There's been two. There's certainly one by us, which is for all folks, and one by our competitor, that's for all folks that are using any glucose-lowering medication. Those are the two that are in front of CMS right now. Those are the two really conversations that are being had, because those are the two proposals that are in front. The conversations about A1C thresholds, it's never been part of any of the conversations we've had. It would be pretty inconsistent with the goal of prevention, which is where the administration is going. How do we reduce your A1Cs?
The answer is, once I reduce your A1Cs, do I take you off of it and let you go right back? Those things have never been part of any sort of approval in the past. They are not approvals that are in any sort of government and/or CGM approval today. They haven't been part of the conversations we've been having. Hopefully, that gives you some context about the discussions we've had, why it tends to take long. It typically does take this long, especially with this large of a request. That being said, we submitted it early last year, so we still believe that the evidence is compelling. The evidence sits in front of CMS. Clearly, they're making sure they cross their Is and dot their Ts.
So the two submissions, one from you, one from your competitor?
Correct.
One of them you said is for patients on glucose medications?
Correct.
Is that yours or the other one?
The other one.
Okay. And yours is just any type 2 non-insulin?
Diagnosis with type 2. Very similar to commercial coverage that exists today.
Got it. Okay. If you get Medicare coverage by mid 2027, is next year more of a build year? Or could it actually contribute in 2027?
Well, certainly, recurring revenue. As you bring folks on, that's certainly helpful, and it will help certainly build. All that being said, when you have these populations coming on, it's certainly helpful as well. When you think about just in terms of recurring revenue, obviously this year we are also building recurring revenue with some of the type 2 commercial wins that we have had. All of this is really just your base continuing to grow. I think that's the most important thing is as more and more folks provide access ultimately drives retention, utilization. We know that when you have access, those numbers go up, and you are seeing it with our type 2 NIT commercial book of business. Obviously, if we were to get that for CMS, that would certainly be a helpful contributor as well.
Does type 2, when you get the Medicare coverage, if and when you get it. Does it accelerate your growth and the market growth above kind of the 10% we are seeing now? Or does it just sustain that?
I think that size of that population, and we will give a more specific guide to next year as we get there and beyond, but when you think about the size of that population, and you think about what happens when you go in and see a physician today. When you go in and see a physician today, there's a one in four shot you have coverage, which is half the commercial book of business. So it's much better than it was. It was much closer to zero. Once you have CMS coverage, and CMS coverage ultimately plays through to Medicare Advantage Part C over time, and usually pretty quickly, all of a sudden you now have 75% coverage. The propensity to write goes up significantly. So our expectation is it's a rising tide lifts all boats, including the overall market opportunity and potentially growth rate.
I think we would expect it to be helpful. I think one of the reasons we have in our LRP 10%+ is making sure we go through the timing, and it's on us to make sure that when we have that coverage, every physician is aware. All the features in our product are really targeted to help that type 2 NIT population. It's up to the industry to continue to move that forward. But we do believe if we do it right, it can be an absolutely, an opportunity to grow faster.
That's helpful. You touched upon it, people have asked about why you have seven million type 2 non-insulin people covered today. The perception is we haven't seen much of an impact. That's a lot of people, but if I read between the lines what you said, you don't think you're at critical mass yet for PCPs to write it regularly.
Yeah, they're still writing it quite often, but I think what happens is, and for those folks that have been fortunate enough to be around the space for a while, or if you're on ride-alongs, you can see it in real time. You get five minutes with a primary care physician, maybe. I was with my primary care physician. I timed it just because I like to do these things. I think I had six minutes with him. There's only so much time they can do to check your benefits, to check where you are.
Now our sales force comes in all the time and tries to help, but there's this critical mass kind of mindset that typically happens around that 70% coverage level, that I think once you get to the fear of writing and then getting a customer coming back saying, "I couldn't access this," really starts to dissipate. Our expectation is that rising tide comment I made earlier does apply to commercial insurance as well. Because now what you've got is people are coming in. You don't need to say, "Okay, are you commercial? Okay, are you on the national formulary or not?" Now you're saying, "Look, I can write it, and I know I've got a really solid chance of you having coverage." In the meantime, we're going to work on the background to improve commercial access.
One of the other challenges, we had the big three PBMs. We just got the fourth PBM, started this quarter. Now you're starting to knock down these national formularies that I think help that propensity to write. That's what we would expect to see more of as a result.
That's helpful. People are obviously excited about type 2 non-insulin, but people are also focused on kind of the business between now and then.
Yeah.
My question is, we've seen the category slow in recent quarters. Why has it slowed, and how are you thinking about the global CGM market growth before you have Medicare type 2 non-insulin coverage?
The way I think about it is, the best way to start is when you look at total patient base and total patient base growth. Last year, we exited the year, we talked about our patient base growing around 20% globally. This year, we've talked about it pretty publicly, we expect our patient base to grow in the high teens. It's not much of a slowing in terms of our viewpoint. In fact, when you look at that, in terms of total patients and total dollar value, it's not slowing, it's basically very similar growth in terms of what it was last year. The base has gotten bigger, and so the percentages change a bit, I get it. It's not necessarily slowing to that extent. I realize that a competitor's revenue has changed over the same period.
I can't necessarily comment on their book of business. But when we see the leads come in, when we see the ultimate total patient progression over time, we do still see a really steady patient progression. You're right, the new patients in total, like the total scripts, they're growing at a similar rate as last year in total scripts. So as a percentage of base, it's a little bit impacted, but I would say that there's a combination of a few things that we have to work on. This is going to be helpful. Certainly, the coverage wins, and as you start to see more and more coverage wins, this is also getting back to letting folks know, for example, there's coverage available for folks in basal and in IIT. Most folks know about IIT, but basal still one to work on.
We've got to develop the products and capabilities that allow folks to get benefit out of their product. When I think about that, I think about, for example, Smart Basal coming out later this year. We're in pilots right now. We've built a CGM that's really been targeted for folks on AID devices and intensive insulin. It's been really focused there. Then we kind of jumped into how do we think about type 2? We haven't done a lot of benefit for folks with basal. The Smart Basal should help. Okay, you know what? I can titrate my basal, get it in control if I'm on a CGM. We believe that's going to help add people to the market in that space, and that's going to be a global rollout over time.
The third one is the "So What?" . You're going to see us continue to come out with the "So What?" For anyone that's worn a CGM, especially as you move out of insulin dosing. "So What?" do I do now that I know I have a 105? I don't know. A lot of times, that's always been the question. You're starting to see it with Stelo. You'll see it with some of the other products we have coming out over time. That "So What?" is going to be a big, important part of our next phase of growth. I think that's the thing as an industry we also have to do is "So What?" Well, here's what you do with it, and this is how this can benefit your life longer term. Help new patients, that'll help retention, it'll help utilization.
Okay. That's helpful. The script trend suggests you're taking share from Abbott. Why is that?
We'll talk about Q2 at least, just because, getting into Q3 and scripts, and I think you've seen enough inconsistency with some of the syndicated data. I don't want to comment. You can ask the providers on that one. But in terms of what you've seen, yeah, we have been taking share. I think one of the big features is we've always thought about coverage as a super important differentiator. When you look at where our competitor has gone, they've gone down the cash pay route, and that's where they've started. They've done really well. Hats off to the competitor in that space. We've done really well when it came to coverage and penetration within coverage, et c. As we've won more coverage, especially in the spaces which we were under-indexed, you've certainly seen us do well there.
In the space that is growing the fastest, which would be the NIT space, where the newest coverage resides, we have incredible coverage there. As a result, we are doing great in terms of share. I think what also has helped is as 15-Day has come out as a product, the new algorithm that is embedded in there and certainly the extended wear length, you are seeing that resonate, and it is resonating quite well with folks. Also, the other features in the roadmap we have laid out I think is helpful. We have spent a lot of time thinking about maybe something that historically is not native to medical devices, but about customer service. I think what you are going to start to see more and more of is a focus on that customer experience.
We have rolled out what is called My Dexcom Account, so it is really more individualized. Really, it is getting to more consumer-grade customer service. We are still on a journey there. There is still some work to do. I think you are going to continue to see us focus on service. I think between having, one, coverage, having 15-Day, the algorithm, and really the quality that Dexcom is historically known for, plus elevating our service component, I think those are really important things, and it is resonating with customers and doctors.
Back to your comment about the "So What?" and a person with 105. What is the "So What?" Is this going to be like food choices? What are the recommendations going to be?
Yes. I think it starts with, and you are starting to see it in Stelo, and I think you are going to see it roll out. The "So What?" is going to be, if you have Stelo has an AI coach. What I love, and I play with it all the time, what I loved about going through AI coach is if you log your food, it will compare your food to your glucose and make recommendations. Macros are going in. They are already in Stelo. They are going into the G-Series over time. Obviously, we are connected with Apple HealthKit, Google Health Connect, Oura, so activity, sleep trends, et c. We are now able to connect the dots between sleep, food, activity, glucose. As you connect those dots, we are able to then give feedback.
One of my favorite feedback moments was, I was going through the AI coach, and it started saying, "Hey, look, across the population, here is the average glucose for folks that have identified as type 2, pre-diabetic, and health and wellness." That is incredibly helpful. Do you know if 105 is good or bad? I will tell you, the average is 109. So you are better than the average person with euglycemic or without diabetes. That kind of feedback is super helpful as you go through. I think those are the kind of things we are trying to provide so that you can do something with this data.
Okay. That is helpful. 15-Day looks like it is going well. Remind us of your targets?
Yeah. So, 15-Day, really good feedback. Really happy with the performance in the field. One of the great things about the performance in the field is every time we launch a product, we also continue to enhance it. There is a new patch, I think that was approved by the FDA, I do not know, call it six, seven months ago, that is cutting in, that is also going out into the field as we speak. People have been thrilled with 15-Day and really getting great feedback, very excited about continuing to see it roll out. Our goal is by the end of the year to have approaching 50% of our U.S. G-Series population moved over. As many of you may or may not know, G6 was officially phased out in terms of production.
And we mentioned kind of wrapped up production here at the end of Q2 into early Q3. We will be moving all of those G6 patients and actively moving them over to G7. The hope is that many of them move over to 15-Day, straight to 15-Day. Certainly, some will move to 10-Day, certainly in the ped space. The expectation is close to 50% by the end of the year, and we are on track, which is great. One of the things that was always the question was how was the G6 kind of rundown going to work, and then how was our pump partner integration going to work out? Happy to say all of the major pump partners are now connected to G7 15-Day, and I'd say the G6 roll out or roll down into G7 has gone as well as could be expected.
From the G6 roll down, was there any kind of leakage?
We haven't seen anything to date. We've been very happy with it, and that's to say the roll down has gone well. Certainly happy to have seen it. There's always the potential for onesie-twosies out there, but I would say this. What we've seen is nothing significant, which is great.
Was it complete?
It's not entirely complete. A lot of folks are still using G6. They have trunk storage, and they're burning through what. They get a 90-day prescription. Some folks are still burning through what they have. It is down to percentage of users onto a single hand at this point. So it's gotten pretty small.
Jereme, new starts are always an important topic for investors. Remind us of what your new start trends were in the first half of this year in the U.S. and globally, please.
Sure. Yeah, Q1 was a record, and Q2 was in line with the record. This is a global discussion. Q1 was really strong outside the U.S. So outside the U.S. was a really strong Q1. Some of that has to do with timing of tender. You know how that works. When we have tenders, you sometimes have folks pop in. Q2 is still really solid outside the U.S., but sequentially down OUS from a super solid Q1. On the flip side, Q1 in the U.S. started off not quite a record, whereas Q2 moved up to in line with the record in the U.S. So the U.S. has actually had a couple sequential quarters of uptick from Q4 to Q1 to Q2, that have been pretty pronounced, to where we've been really happy to see it. Q2 was in line with that Q1 overall global record.
So really, really happy to see that trend over time, certainly in the U.S. market. We would expect both markets to continue to do well over the course of the year. Just happy to see the momentum. OUS is really more of timing of tenders and/or coverage unlocks. We've been happy with the performance so far to date.
Stelo, it looks like it has been kind of stuck in this $35 million-$42 million range by our kind of estimates. What accelerates that?
Yeah. Stelo has done well. While we do not disclose each quarter, it has done well. The one thing I think you are pointing to, and it is something we talked about all along with Stelo, is there are two things we have got to work on. Not work on, there are two things with Stelo to be mindful of. One, Stelo is forming a great feeder to type 2 commercial coverage, and so that is something we have always thought is a great opportunity. Go into the physician's office, make sure that they know if a patient does not have coverage, there is Stelo. By the way, if you are checking to see if they have coverage, a sample or Stelo can work. And so it is an opportunity for folks to come on, and obviously, we want them, if they have coverage, to move into a G-Series product.
So we do see that happening. The other thing is, it gets back to the so what conversation. When we launched Stelo, the product was designed really as, in many ways, a product targeted at type 2. We talked about that. There were features we needed to add over time to really bring in the pre-diabetes and health and wellness user. And the product did incredibly well, $100 million in its first 12 months, despite really having some limited features and capability. I think the so what conversation has started in Stelo, and we have to continue that conversation, which is, how do we make sure the so what happens for folks using it? If you have downloaded the new Stelo app, and if you have not, I highly recommend it starts to take you through that.
The feature set is really more geared toward a consumer experience, but it also has the so what. It's got articles and data to help you better understand how to manage glucose, and this is just the start. I think it gives you kind of the code base that we're now moving to, which should be more consumer-centric. Ultimately, what we learn from this will help inform how we modify our G-Series app over time.
That's helpful. Jereme, just last one on 2026.
Sure.
I just want to give you a chance to talk about how you see what the guidance assumes for the second half. Any considerations, Q3, Q4, U.S., OUS?
Yeah, look, I think we gave a full year guide. We talked about the two U.S., OUS businesses really exited last year at about the similar full-year growth rate. We started this year saying think about it that way. The OUS got off to a nice start. What I would say is, it doesn't change our viewpoint. Our viewpoint is very, very similar, in terms of the two should contribute pretty equally over the year, give or take a point or so. We talked about this on the last call, so I don't think there's anything to change necessarily in terms of the guidance. I think we're excited about the rest of the year. I think we've laid out a lot of plans over the course of this year and into next year.
We're excited about Ireland coming on. I know folks have really incorporated that into their models as Ireland goes from a kind of a startup facility in OpEx to a facility making products in Q4. We've always told folks to be mindful of the gross margin and operating margin. I don't think we have anything to change necessarily from what we've talked about in the past.
That's helpful. Let's talk about the future. For 2027, the Street's at about 11% growth next year. Essentially the floor you laid out at Investor Day, 10% +. Any puts and takes to consider?
The LRP is 10% +. I think as long as folks are kind of listening to where the LRP is, I think that's a good starting point. We talked about let us give you more fidelity as we get into each year as a component. What we want to do is make sure we're taking into account all the approvals that are out there. Certainly, as you think about the U.S., we know there's a big one on the horizon. We want to make sure we have as much clarity as possible to help investors make that call. We still believe it's not an if, but a when, and that's never changed. I know when becomes a really big deal when you're talking about individual years. We want to make sure we give you as much fidelity as possible as we get closer.
Also a lot of those OUS markets. When does basal kick in in a lot of these countries? We will get a little bit more clarity. In the meantime, 10%+ is the LRP. We always recommend staying close to that, and let us give you that fidelity as we get closer.
How is Japan going?
Japan is going well. Japan is a market in which coverage all the way through basal. We have got our feet kind of starting to get under us in that market. If you remember the first year, we took a transition from Terumo, so it took time to build up that sales force. Jennifer Cho, our head, and Gen Asano, our lead there, they are doing a nice job bringing the sales force in more permanently. So we would expect to see that continue to contribute over time. So Japan should be a bigger market as we grow over time, and certainly it is going to be one of our bigger markets in APAC.
That is helpful. Back to 2027, the margins. When do we start to see more of a contribution from Ireland and 15-Day?
Yeah. The way to think about next year, and this is typical for a facility startup, I would expect Ireland to have a bit of an impact on margins as it launches, as you'd expect, right? You're going to have a facility that you turn on. You don't turn it on hitting full speed. It takes a few quarters, and sometimes it takes a few more even. But I think we've got a pretty good feel for our process. It takes a few quarters to get up and ramping. We've talked about that. Look, you'll have the first half of the year, Ireland getting up to speed. For those that kind of, if you want to get into the kind of the variances, variance is amortized. As you build product, those variances amortize in.
On the flip side, if our jump-off point, so call it first half weight. On the flip side, 15-Day, if we're approaching 50% by the end of the year, that means our starting point is 50%. Our starting point at the beginning of this year was zero, right? So 20%-25% of your population might've been on blended average using 15-Day. Your starting point's 50. You start to see a pretty meaningful offset on 15-Day, which really starts to anchor up the gross margin over time. I would expect to see 15-Day as a pretty significant contributor next year. We've talked about, it just continues to contribute more and more. The next big opportunity for 15-Day is now all the OUS markets, right? Because we started in the U.S., and we've been talking about the U.S. in isolation. We just got Canadian approval on 15-Day.
We're working on a few others. The goal will then to be launch 15-Day in these international markets. Again, that'll continue to be a multi-year tailwind to gross margin.
Did I hear you say that Ireland is a headwind in the beginning of 2027?
Yeah. Should be, as we ramp it up.
When we look at the LRP-
Yeah.
You gave pretty impressive margin goals. I think it was gross and operating margin. Correct me if I'm wrong.
It was.
But it was like 150 basis points a year to get to 2029 from w as it 2025 or 2026 is the base?
Well, the growth of the total basis points was from 2025. We walked it from 2026, but yeah.
On the margins?
Yeah.
I guess my question is, how do we think about the contribution to the LRP on the margin side in 2027 net-net?
Yeah.
Because you highlighted Ireland as a headwind, but 15-Day as a tailwind.
Yeah.
How does 2027 contribute to the LRP?
Yeah. We certainly think 2027 is a big contributor to that LRP. We will give you specific guidance as we get in there. But remember, 15-Day was not much of an impact this year. It becomes a pretty darn significant impact next year. That is why I think that is an important piece to remember. This year, remember, Ireland, first three quarters of the year, all that OpEx is going to sit in OpEx. That goes into gross margin. When we talk about being a headwind, remember what it is also not. It is a tailwind on OpEx.
Right.
You are going to start to see that contribution both on the top from 15-Day, but then the movement of Ireland up into COGS. You will start to see some leverage there on Op margin. It should be a pretty significant contributor to next year. We will give specific guidance as we move into next year, but you should expect to see us make meaningful progression on that pathway to our LRP starting, well, starting this year early, but next year as well.
Oh, good. That is helpful. All right. Pipeline. G8, slated for end of 2027, early 2028. I guess what is the kind of the pathway to get to potentially end of 2027, early 2028 launch, and have you kind of prioritized the analytes after glucose?
Yeah. I think we're making great progress towards G8, and I think you guys have seen. Investor Day, we were able at least to show folks what G8's going to look like. Certainly a lot of that design lock is in place. The process from here on out is going to be finishing any sort of design lock, software coding, et c., that needs to. Like firmware updates that you would typically expect as part of development, and the team is doing that as we speak. Once we get through that, it'll be producing runs, testing internally, then moving into clinical trials. We'll start those clinical trials, which will ultimately form the basis for the submission to the FDA and for BSI in Europe. We would be doing that, I mean, essentially the work is going on as we speak.
The expectation, again, end of 2027, early 2028. As we mentioned at our Investor Day, that's the timeframe we would expect to launch. Good progress. Looking forward to it, and quite frankly, looking forward to this platform because this platform does provide the baseline for a dual-analyte platform. Now to your question, which analytes are prioritized? We've prioritized multiple, but obviously potassium is the one we talked about at Investor. That's one we think has the biggest opportunity. We also have been working on ketones for some time. Those are ones we've talked about publicly. We have worked on other analytes, don't see as big of markets for those, but we have those kind of in the hopper as well.
Certainly, potassium would be the one we see the biggest market opportunity for, but certainly ketones is there and could be a fast follower in the event we
Jereme, just to push back a little bit. If you haven't like kind of locked down the design of G8. Just kind of think about the timeline to do a clinical trial, submission, and approval end of 2027, early 2028 does feel a little aggressive as we sit here in September 2026?
Yeah. Look, I think you're assuming that where we are is not in a good position, and there's a lot of continued work. We are in a good position in terms of design and how we're thinking about it. I wouldn't let that read in.
No, I didn't mean. Sorry. I didn't mean to. You're not in a good position. I'm just thinking about-
Yeah.
how long it takes to do a trial-
Yeah.
and FDA review times.
Yeah. I wouldn't read into it with anything from that perspective. I think we remain confident in those dates. The whole organization is working towards it. So I would leave it at that as opposed to going. We'll have more updates to come over time.
Okay. That's helpful. The FDA approval for Libre Duo. Anything noteworthy there? Some of the documentation's on the FDA website.
Yeah.
Has your view changed on ketones?
Our view hasn't changed on ketones. Just to reiterate our view, our view is, look, majority of the issues that you find in the space of ketone issues is when you're not on a sensor. Typically when you find it in the case of DKA, especially in children, it's because you're not on a sensor yet. The unmet need is you're not on a sensor, not necessarily that you need to measure ketones. In the event that you do have an issue with a pump line jamming, et c., again, the easiest answer there is your glucose levels start to rise. That happens well before you end up in a DKA event. So most of those are solved. The issue we've always seen an opportunity for ketones in, and it's the euglycemic DKA issue. So this would be the SGLT2 user.
We've always thought that was a space, and that's why we still pursue ketones, and we still think it's an important feature, especially for that market. For if you want to get into health and wellness, certainly getting into ketosis for the keto diet. So those, we see the primary markets. Nevertheless, we understand the importance there. I think we're going to watch and learn and see where those go, and I think we will have one. We don't see it as this big of a market. Nevertheless, Duo will be the first to market there.
If they price it at parity, does that change your view vs pricing it at a premium and asking for a new code?
Yeah. I think at the end of the day, it's a feature, and that's how we think about it. It's a feature and from our point of view, it's a feature that doesn't move the needle as much as some of the other features that are really important to folks, especially in the space that we're talking about it. So it doesn't necessarily change the view, but nevertheless, that's our view. We've been very consistent in that view, but over time, if we need to make pivots and changes, we certainly have the capability to do that. But nevertheless, it has not been something that's been a major area we think that the market has been yelling for.
One other pipeline question. Hospital CGM.
Yes.
Actually, at your Investor Day, you said you expect to launch by the end of 2027, I believe.
That is correct.
Is that still on track?
It is. Yeah. So we're working diligently there. I think the hospital program's been one of those items that's been an unmet need for some time. We've always had a program in the hopper. I think the biggest challenge we've always had is how do you test and create the environment? If you want to go the classic 510(k) route, you've got to basically take people's glucose down very low in a hospital setting. Not something that's easy to do work for. So we've worked with the FDA on how best to demonstrate the capability. I think we found a way there, which is great. So the expectations are the same. We continue to work diligently on getting a product available for it and looking forward to it, and that's still our expectation.
How meaningful of an opportunity do you think that'll be?
I think over time it can be very meaningful. It's going to require changing some standards of care in the hospital, but every time you're in the hospital, you ask the question, "Why are we running around pricking people's fingers?" 14 million dysglycemic events per year in the hospital. A number, I think, continues to go up. So those would be people that would be ripe to be on a sensor, over those windows, and certainly, those are who you'd target. But the reality is, how do you know there's a dysglycemic event unless you're pricking fingers? Everybody that could potentially have one, you expect folks to be on those over time, if we can change the standards of care, which will be our goal.
All right. A couple seconds left here, Jereme. I am going to give you the last word. Appreciate you being here.
Well, thanks for having me, and thanks to everybody in the room for joining. Really appreciate it. Look, I think we continue to be really excited about the Dexcom story. It is one of those industries, we always say it, there is over half a billion people in the world with diabetes, and yet maybe 2% are on CGM care right now. The opportunity remains incredible. It is on us and our industry to go after it, but looking forward to it and looking forward to doing what we do, which is empowering people to take control of their health. So thank you. Thanks for your time today. Appreciate it.