Great. Thank you, Dennis, for hosting us at the conference. We're pleased to be here. I'll just give a quick presentation to recap our quarter, and then we'll get into Q&A. To skip our forward-looking statements and just refer you to our disclosures, please. To give you a quick update on the company, we're a computational lab for molecular discovery. The application is mostly in drug discovery. In AI computational-based drug discovery, everyone knows it's all about the quality of the data. Where we step in is supplementing experimental data with simulation data and doing that in a way that's as accurate as the experimental data so that you have a training set upon which you can generate the computations. Many new entrants in the field are starting to embrace the simulation approach and the physics-based approach to doing this. Many of them are our customers.
We're very pleased that they're seeing the approach the same that we are. In terms of validation of our company and our platform, we have about $250 million of revenue and billions of dollars of M&A volume that's transacted around our molecules. The core of our company is a computational platform, as I referenced. We monetize this in three primary ways. We have a software business that's utilized by life science and material science customers. We have over 1,700 customers, as you can see there. We also monetize the platform in collaborations with pharmaceutical partners and also some material science customers. We have 19 active collaborations, which has grown over the past 12 months. We do internal drug discovery on our own on a proprietary basis. We have seven active programs there.
To give you an update on the quarter that we just reported, $54 million in revenue, which grew 54% year on year, $40.9 million in software, which grew 28%, and $13.5 million in drug discovery. We also made a number of announcements this quarter regarding our guidance, still maintaining about $250 million of total revenue, but a slight decrease in software revenue offset by a slight increase in drug discovery revenue. 8%-13% software and $49-$52 million of drug discovery revenue. We also announced a transition to focus more on an R&D-based model in discovery. Our intention is to complete dose escalation studies on our two clinical programs and then find partners to advance the remainder of development, and also that we will not seek to advance any of our internal assets to the IND stage.
In terms of the effect of those announcements, we believe this will leave Schrödinger as a more focused, streamlined company with a goal towards profitability. In terms of our pipeline, what's shown on the page here is a collection of the assets that we've worked on and generated IP. We are pleased to see the continued progression of these molecules in the hands of our partners all the way through commercialization. What's also on the page is our preclinical work in collaboration with pharmaceutical partners. Each of those partners listed there, we have multiple targets active in our collaborative efforts there. The reason we're focused on our discovery efforts in preclinical is our track record. We've generated $600 million in the last five years through upfronts, the sale of companies, and other milestones.
If you look at what that means in our portfolio, we have 15 programs in which we are entitled to milestones or royalties, and the collective milestone opportunity there is $5 billion over the course of those programs. To just recap our strategic priorities, we are focused on completing our dose escalation studies and presenting data on 3515. That will be presented early next year. 1505 will be presenting additional data around ASH. Around our software platform, it's increasing the adoption with our pharma customers and rolling out new products and enhancements to the platform. I'll wrap up there and pleased to take questions from Dennis.
Great. Thank you, Richard, for that presentation. Maybe just from a big-picture perspective, when you look across the space, the industry, there's been a lot of enthusiasm around AI, drug discovery, et cetera. There's been many deals done from pharma, not only with you, but with other platforms as well. Can you just talk a little bit about what makes Schrödinger's platform unique and some of the points of differentiation?
Yeah.
Yeah. Karen Akinsanya, I'm Head of R&D for Therapeutics and also Chief Strategy Officer for Partnering. The application of computation to drug discovery is obviously not new. Schrödinger has been around for 30 years, essentially building a physics-based platform that allows you to accurately compute the properties of molecules. What's happened in the last five or so years is the application of machine learning to drug discovery, and that really relies on training sets, existing data that is essentially used to generate new molecules. The difference between, I would say, what we do is that we incorporate physics, and that's highly accurate. You don't need a training set. I think the fact that the pharma industry, our customers, all pharma companies and a very large slice of biotech use our platform, it's a professionally software-developed software development effort.
I think the difference between what you're seeing now with AI-driven drug discovery is whether those methods can be used in conjunction with, I would say, the physics-based methods that are used ubiquitously now based on our platform in the industry.
Maybe talk a little bit about the overall trend for you guys in terms of the software revenue, just how that has grown over time. Is it just around enthusiasm in the biotech industry for more drug discovery to discover more unique molecules that have higher probability of success, or is it any other fundamental drivers of your software growth?
Yeah, I'm happy to cover that. Over the past few years, the biotech component of our business and its contribution to growth has been challenging. That continues to be the case. As we see some early signs of recovery there, we'll look to see how that materializes. What has driven the growth over the past few years is expanding our relationships with pharma customers. This is about their embracing a compute-first, predict-first approach into their drug discovery organizations and increasing the licenses and seats and the adoption across their organizations of our approach. We do collaborative programs with a number of these customers, and that we see as a high correlation and a high causation to allow those customers to utilize the software on their own for their own R&D programs.
In terms of software revenue, usually it can be a little bit lumpy, a little bit choppy during the year. As you think about 2026, I guess how much visibility do you have on software revenue and on some of these contracts that hopefully will be renewed or expanded even?
Yeah. Q4 is our biggest quarter for bookings and renewals. As we close out this quarter, we'll have a better sense into 2026 what the opportunities are.
Okay. Should the expectation be that you guys will continue to grow software revenue year over year?
Yeah.
Okay. Great. We'd love to talk a little bit more about some of these partnerships that you have with Novartis, Lilly, et cetera. How did those come to be? I guess, does that open, do successful milestones from those partnerships open up a bigger avenue for software licensing and usage across their companies?
Yeah, maybe I can start on the partnership. Going back 15 years, Schrödinger has been partnering around the platform and helping to invent molecules. Richie covered that in the opening remarks around our partnerships and co-founding of companies. More recently, we've been accelerating the number of partnerships we have with pharma companies. 2020 BMS, Lilly in 2022, Novartis last year. The way these partnerships come about is essentially two ways. Number one, they already are using the platform, and they are interested in expanding the use of the platform. At the same time, we're socializing some of our proprietary programs with them. Usually, there's a meeting of minds around particular targets that are of high interest where we've initiated the work or where they've initiated the work, and there's a joining of forces to fully deploy the platform across those programs.
That portfolio of collaborations, as you heard Richie say, has expanded quite profoundly over the last five years to the extent that we now have quite a bit of upfront that's being recognized as revenue, but also milestones coming from those. What we've also seen is companies now, with this front-row seat on how we use the platform, significantly scaling up their use of the platform and their spend on the technology.
Thanks, Karen. To address the second part of your question, earning and recognizing milestones on our programs, we see as additional proof points and validation of the benefits of working with us. We also see that leading to those partners coming back and adding collaboration programs with us and expanding the relationship.
Yeah. I'm not sure what is more validating than multiple M&A of assets that spun out of Schrödinger, right?
Yeah, agree. Just one other comment I'd add is our ability to execute in discovery, if we look over a five or ten-year time period, we are able to generate DCs quicker than what we could before, whether it's with a collaboration partner or whether it's on our own proprietary assets.
Okay. I guess moving on to the pipeline, just remind us of some of the promising data you guys had in MALT1, as well as some of the data that's coming up for the Wee1 program.
Yeah, sure. I can provide an update on MALT1. This is essentially downstream of the BTK receptor, controls NF-κB signaling. We've completed now dose escalation in our phase one study where we demonstrated differentiated safety, no DLTs, no deaths, essentially very strong PD data demonstrating that we have shut down NF-κB signaling, and that translated to early signs of monotherapy activity, 100% response rate in Waldenstrom's, relapsed refractory to BCL2 and to BTK, and also responses in CLL, mantle cell, and a range of tumor types or histologies where you typically see BTK working. We think this is a very exciting opportunity for the post-BTK, post-degrader, post-BCL2 population that will be growing as people come off those drugs.
We announced, I think it was in August, that we, having now completed a good portion of the phase one study, will be looking for partners for that program. The second program is our Wee1/Myt1 co-inhibitor. This is a synthetic lethal play on what we know that Wee1 has efficacy, where we're approaching opening up that therapeutic index because of that synthetic lethal relationship. That program is in dose escalation right now, and we plan to share data on that program in the first half of next year. So far, so good. Things are going well, and we look forward to sharing that update.
How should we think about that phase one update in terms of efficacy and safety, PK, et cetera?
Yeah, sure. As you saw this year with the EHA, we were very careful not to dribble out data. We essentially had completed our analysis of the PK-PD relationship, the safety up through the dose escalation, and also had gathered sufficient repeat scans on patients. That is the same approach we are taking with this program. We will not be trickling out data. We decided to move this to first half so we can more thoroughly analyze the data. We will get PK data. We will get PD engagement of Wee1 and Myt1, and also preliminary efficacy data looking for, obviously, responses in solid tumors.
Okay. Have you talked about what sort of solid tumors are being enrolled in the study?
Yeah. So, as you know, Wee1 inhibitors have shown very impressive efficacy in uterine serous carcinoma and ovarian, but we've also been enrolling other types of solid tumors. There will be a mix of data across gynecological as well as other solid tumors.
Okay. Can you talk a little bit about the biology around Wee1 and Myt1? And by inhibiting that, should we be expecting fairly strong responses, or is it more of a cytostatic type of mechanism where maybe ORR may not be super strong, but the benefit comes from PFS or DOR?
Yeah, that's a great question, actually. The biology here is that Wee1 inhibitors are DNA damage repair compounds. What you essentially are doing is pushing cancer cells into this catastrophic apoptosis. Previously, it has been shown that just the DNA damage repair Wee1 inhibitor on its own can drive stable disease, prolonged stable disease, as well as partial responses in solid tumors. The issue, though, has been that safety has been a challenge. You can imagine that rapidly turning over cells in the body are also impacted by a cell cycle kinase inhibitor. What we've done with our Wee1/Myt1 co-inhibitor is to take advantage of that synthetic lethal relationship, where essentially Myt1 is a brake on Wee1. It basically means that you need to dose higher with a single Wee1 agent.
We have shown preclinically that when you have the Myt1 synthetic lethal, you can dose up without having extreme toxicity. You can also see that there is less resistance forming to Wee1 in that synthetic lethal pair. What we hope to be able to see at the end of phase one, obviously, we will be sharing initial data, but by the end of phase one, what we are looking for is evidence of efficacy, stable disease, PRs, but also that we can safely dose Wee1 up in the presence of this Myt1 and that that translates to people staying on the drug.
Yeah. Okay. Can you remind us what are some of the on-target talks for a Wee1?
Yeah. As I mentioned, rapidly turning over cells are going to be particularly sensitive, and that means you see cytopenias, you can see gastric disturbances, diarrhea, changes in blood cell counts, really sort of significant AEs that mean people discontinue. What we're hoping to see is that we're seeing fewer of those side effects. The extent to which you can get rid of them, I think, is limited because these are DDR agents, but really just opening up that window that allows people to stay on drug.
Sure. As you complete the phase one, I guess, what are next steps after that? Is it just to go out and look for partnerships and kind of in line with what you guys have been saying on Q3 in terms of this shift in strategy?
Yeah, totally consistent with the strategy that was shared by Richie and we spoke about on our earnings call. Each of these mechanisms, I'll say first MALT1, we believe this is a mechanism that will combine very well with BTK inhibitors. Across multiple histologies and in combination, that really requires a focused effort to maximize the value of the asset. I would say the same thing on Wee1/Myt1. I think people are excited about the activity they've seen with Wee1 inhibitors. If we have a package that supports combinations, supports the opportunity to essentially have people stay on drug, not just on Wee1 inhibitors. In fact, today a paper came out, I don't know if you guys saw it, about CDK4/6 and Wee1. We think that these are really interesting combination opportunities for partners who have such assets.
Okay. Interesting. Maybe taking a step back, can you talk a little bit more about that change in strategy of no longer going into the clinic by yourself?
Yeah.
What was the rationale behind it? I know Richie, you mentioned around profitability and cost optimization, but can you give a little bit more color there?
Yeah. I think there's many factors that went into these decisions. What we feel is that the most synergistic elements of the business are the software licensing and the collaboration and preclinical discovery efforts. That's where we want to focus. That's where we see the growth opportunities and the combined benefits across both those pillars. We are very proud of our pipeline page and the work and the track record and the progression of molecules on the hands of our partners. We look forward to continuing that journey on our clinical programs and our clinic-ready programs.
Yeah. Maybe just to say that, just to reiterate the $600 million that we've generated over the last five years, that's not come from partnering clinical programs. It's actually come from partnering discovery programs. The thesis five, six years ago that we could essentially generate that much value from discovery partnerships was unclear. I think we've clarified that now, and we would be able to generate value without necessarily the risk and the spend of clinical development.
Right, because the preclinical drug discovery aspect is kind of Schrödinger's secret sauce, right? Not necessarily clinical development and execution, which obviously takes a lot of capital. You guys are conscious about the cash runway and the spend, et cetera, over the long term.
Yeah. Not giving up the upside, right? The important thing is the milestones, the royalties. We have royalties on 15 programs already in that table that continues to grow. That gives us future opportunity for value.
Okay. Should we be expecting additional pharma partnerships over the next 12 to 24 months? Similar to kind of like the Novartis deal, et cetera. I'm just trying to gauge the amount of interest and enthusiasm right now and some color around the discussions that you guys are having.
I mean, I think we want to be careful not to guide to any specific type or cadence of BD deals, but it's been such an important piece of our story over the last five, actually last 15 years that doing deals, partnering, I think is going to remain a key part of our fabric. Yes, you should expect more deals when they are and who they're with. I think we will share when the time is right.
Sure. When we think about the platform, it seems like it's very therapeutic area agnostic, right? Is that fair?
Yes.
Is there, as you guys go through some of these target identifications and picking the right targets to go into, I guess, tell us a little bit about your thought process on figuring out which one may seem the most de-risked and which one may give the platform an edge in terms of actually coming out with a very promising molecule.
I can start. I mean, I think the first thing to say about being therapeutic area agnostic is it gives us a lot of diversification. If you look at that pipeline page, we're in immunology, we're in oncology, we're in a lot of very significant disease areas, which is great. In terms of how we think about picking targets, the human evidence component is critical. We think there's a lot of risk in taking novel targets that have only been validated in preclinical models. We incorporate our understanding of clinical data, human genetic evidence. Most importantly, because we're a structure-based drug design company, it's really around what do we understand about the structure of that protein, the molecular structure function link, and how that links to pathophysiology. That's something that we've built up a really strong capability in.
It is actually one of the things that led to the Novartis deal. We had what we believe to be the first structure for that target and a really good understanding of how to drug it in a very large chronic disease indication. We intend to do more of that, combining all of these different data sets that we do not necessarily generate, but that we synthesize and think about how to overlay that on novel structures.
Sure. In the last one or two minutes, maybe just remind us of your cash, some of the optimization efforts that you guys have announced, as well as the runway.
Yeah. We're end of the quarter at $401 million in cash. This year, we've made two significant actions. In May, we had a $30 million expense reduction program. In 2025, we'll recognize more than half of that. The balance will come next year. The collective effect of identifying partners for the clinical programs will result in about a $40 million saving once we've wound down those programs and transferred them out. The net effect of those things will obviously improve our operational profile as well as our profitability profile. We're not concerned about runway, but obviously, those changes will extend the runway as well. We feel very well capitalized to kind of run the business in front of us.
Great. Thank you so much for being here. It's great seeing you. Really looking forward to 2026.
Thank you.
Thank you.