Good evening, everyone, and welcome to Q4 and FY '26 earnings conference call of Jagsonpal Pharmaceuticals Limited. We have on call with us Mr.

Manish Gupta, Managing Director, Mr. Amrut Medhekar, Chief Operating Officer, and Mr.

Nirav Vora, Chief Financial Officer. We must remind you that the discussion on today's call may include certain forward-looking statements and must be therefore viewed in conjunction with the risks pertaining to the business.

I now request the management to take us through the same and provide some more insight on the quarter and year gone by. Post that, we'll open the floor to Q&A.

Thank you, and over to you, sir.

Yeah. Thank you, Soumya, and good afternoon, everyone.

Thanks for joining the call, and we appreciate your continued interest and support for Jagsonpal. I am pleased to report that Jagsonpal is back on growth in Q4 after two quarters of sluggish performance.

This is on the back of sharpened focus on execution, especially in the area of MR productivity and retention. At the industry level, while the IPM grew between 7 to 8% during Q4 and most of the year, we have outperformed meaningfully at both the quarter and MAT level, giving us the necessary confidence of growth acceleration going forward.

For FY '26, while the revenue growth has been modest at around 7%, our net profit has grown at 19% before exceptional items. The performance is underpinned by financial discipline and focused execution, which is also reflected in our strong cash position, which was upwards of ₹190 crores at the end of the year, or on 31st March.

While we continue to scout for strategic inorganic initiatives, the board of the Jagsonpal is also guided by capital allocation philosophy that remains focused on disciplined value creation and efficient cash deployment. Alongside the ₹40 crore buyback announced on 12th March at ₹250 per share with no promoter participation, the board has also recommended a 200% dividend for the year, which includes a one-time special dividend of 75%.

While the shareholder approval for the buyback was received on 27th April, the enhanced dividend is subject to the shareholder approval in the forthcoming AGM. These steps of the board are fully reflective of the focus on improving the return on capital employed and/or return on equity, as also their confidence in acceleration of business in FY '27 and beyond, driving strong, continued cash flow generation for the business.

Looking ahead, our strategic priorities remain consistent, which is about driving organic growth through enhanced MR productivity, sharper brand focus, and disciplined cost management, while we continue to evaluate value-accretive inorganic opportunities. With a stronger execution framework, we are confident of sustaining and accelerating the growth momentum while delivering consistent long-term value to our stakeholders.

I would now request Amrut, our Chief Operating Officer, to take you through the operational performance.

Thank you, Manish, and good evening, everyone. As Manish rightly mentioned that the last two quarters had centered around strengthening the execution engine of the business, and we are now beginning to see the impact of these efforts translating into stronger operational performance.

While the broader industry, which is IPM, has grown at around 7 to 8%, Jagsonpal has started to outperform meaningfully. On an MAT basis, which is annual sales, the company has delivered 12.2% growth as per PharmaTrac, outperforming the market by 3.6%.

This momentum has accelerated further in the last quarter, which is quarter four, where the growth reached 14.2% against the industry growth of 10.5%. This performance was driven by disciplined execution, stronger internal processes, and our focused operating efforts supported by an asset-light business model that allows us to remain agile, efficient, and consistently cash-generative.

On the other side, if you look at the brands and portfolio, Jagsonpal continues to maintain a very strong and balanced portfolio. Our top 10 brands currently constitute approximately 58 to 60% of our total sales, depending on the quarter, providing both the scale and stability for the business.

Importantly, nine out of these top 10 brands are ranked within the top five in their respective categories, reflecting the competitiveness, prescription strength, and sustainability of our core portfolio. Growth has been led by strong traction across the key therapies, in particularly gynecology and dermatology, both of which witnessed prescription momentum and remain important growth anchors for the organization.

These segments have shown strong doctor engagement and improved prescription conversion, supported by focused execution and sharper brand investments. While a few mature brands in select therapies saw some moderation during the year, the strength in these high-growth segments has more than offset the same, resulting in a healthy overall growth trajectory.

A major focus area for us during the year has been strengthening the front-end capabilities. We have invested in a very structured MR training programs and managers' development program, aimed at improving the doctor coverage, call quality, territory productivity, and consistency of our engagement.

Alongside this, we have worked on improving the field force stability and retention, which has been an important driver for stronger execution over the last quarter. At the same time, we have sharpened our brand investment strategy by increasing focus on high-potential brands and ensuring better allocation of our resources towards therapies and brand building, where we see stronger growth visibility as well as sustainable long-term opportunities.

These efforts are now clearly reflecting in our improved field productivity, stronger doctor engagement, and better execution on the ground, which is visible in relatively better quarter four performance. With these building blocks now firmly in place, we are well positioned to deliver more consistent, scalable, and market-outperforming growth in the coming quarters.

Thank you so much, and now I request Nirav, our CFO, to take you through the financial highlights.

Thanks, Amrut. Thank you, everyone, for joining us.

From a financial perspective, Q4 FY '26 reflects a strong improvement in operating performance, with revenue growing by 10% year-on-year to ₹64 crore, supported by healthy demand momentum across key therapies and stronger execution. This translated into EBITDA growth of 9% year-on-year to close to ₹11 crores, while maintaining stable margin at close to 16%, reflecting disciplined cost management and operating resilience.

Profitability saw a sharper uptick, with PAT rising to 31% year-on-year to close to ₹9 crore, and with the PAT margins expanding to about 14%. For the full year, FY '26 revenue grew by approx 7% to ₹287 crore, and operating EBITDA stood at close to ₹61 crore, with a margin of approx 21%.

At the profitability level, our profits from operations grew by 19% year-on-year to close to ₹45 crore, reflecting a margin of about 16%. The only exceptional item during the year was the impact of new labor code, which was taken in Q3.

Overall, the business continues to show meaningful improvement in core quality and profitability. We also continue to maintain a strong balance sheet with a cash position of over ₹190 crore.

Working capital remains well managed, with net working capital cycle at close to 11 days, reflecting our continued focus on financial discipline and prudent capital allocation. On the buyback front, we have received shareholders' approval for the proposed ₹40 crore buyback of up to 16 lakh equity shares at a price of ₹250 per share.

As mentioned earlier, the promoters shall not be participating in the same. This move is expected to have significant impact on our return ratios, with RoE increasing from approx 16% to 18%, while RoCE shall improve from approx 22% to close to 26%.

This reinforces the board's focus on efficient capital deployment and long-term value creation for public shareholders. The record date is May 04, 2026, for the same.

The detailed buyback timelines and process will continue as per regulatory requirement. Alongside this, the board has also recommended a 200% dividend, including a one-time special dividend of 75%.

This will result in a total payout of ₹4 per share and an overall cash distribution of approx ₹26 crore. Between buyback and dividend, the company shall be returning over ₹66 crore to the shareholders.

This reflects our confidence in both in the strength of our business model and in the capabilities of generating free cash. We stay confident of sustaining and accelerating growth while maintaining disciplined capital returns.

That concludes our update. We shall now be happy to take your questions.

Thank you.

Hi, am I audible?

Q4 marks a very strong recovery after two relatively muted quarters. How much of this improvement is structural versus seasonal?

Thank you so much. See, if you look at our portfolio, we hardly have products which are seasonal in nature.

Therefore, what we see today is purely driven by operational strengthening as well as some of the steps that we had taken in terms of our brand building and MR productivity improvement. All the growth which is there seems to be completely strategic and structurally made in favor of yields.

I don't see any of the seasonal impact there.

What were key triggers behind such a sharp improvement in Q4 execution? Going forward, will the company perform the same way?

If you remember, Deepesh, I'm not sure you were there in the last con-call, but we had given you this guidance that we will be delivering a double-digit growth. That's what exactly we have delivered.

We have done the walk the talk. Second part is, we have also given you a guidance that we'll be looking at beating the market growth.

That is what our objective has been. Obviously, we are taking aspiration to beat it by 1.5x, which is 1.5 times more than the Indian pharma market growth.

In that direction, we had taken several steps which I enumerated in my talk, which includes improving of field force productivity by way of improving their training, their skills, upskilling them, and more importantly, trying to engage more customers so that our prescription value for doctor increases, and thereby resulting in lesser of cost for acquisition of newer business. Therefore, I always call it as a profitable growth for the organization.

Right. What is the biggest execution risk in achieving the targets which you have given?

Execution risk may be macro. On a micro level, at an organization level, I do not see because we have very well-established, very old legacy brands which continue to drive its market share in the current therapies and molecule bucket.

However, there are certain new product opportunities obviously which we are continuously looking at, which are into our strength areas, which we intend to build. Maybe one execution risk maybe that we may go over-aspirational on certain products, but yet we want to give them a full try with our heart and soul so that we are able to achieve them.

We are not sure how those molecules will eventually emerge as a macro market. I only see a macro risk happening for the organization.

At our level, internally within the organization, we are super confident of delivering operational excellence and growth which is backed by profits.

What gives the management confidence of further acceleration beyond the current IPM outperformance?

One is obviously it is too early for us to say. As I said earlier on, this is our first quarter wherein we had committed you a double-digit growth.

That's what we have aimed for and we tried to deliver. I'm hopeful that the steps that we are taking towards rationalizing some of our resources and also reallocating those resources for more productive use, I think that will be one of the three key drivers, besides, of course, improving our own capability and skills of the team so that they perform better in the market and are able to compete meaningfully in clinic for the doctor.

Okay. How should investors think about FY '27 growth versus the stated target of 1.5x IPM growth?

We continue to maintain that guidance, sir.

Okay. Just my last question, what is the reason of distributing so much of cash to shareholders?

Don't we see any growth opportunity in our company or any investment as such?

Deepesh, I think this is not an easy question for the board, simply because how much cash is adequate cash, this depends from person to person. Personally, as a company, the board is of the view that keeping too much cash is also not productive, specially in the scenario of falling yields and also in a scenario wherein now we have access to bank finance.

If you look at our own balance sheet, you can easily believe that we can raise upwards of ₹200 crores as fresh debt in the company. We have close to ₹190 crores of cash.

Given our cash flows, we are very hopeful of recouping whatever we are paying out within the next 12 months. Technically, we do have wherewithal to undertake an acquisition of up to ₹400 crores with our own balance sheet.

I think that is more than sufficient in the view of the board, and I think they took a very pragmatic decision of not keeping too much cash in the company beyond what is potentially needed.

Sir, just to counter that, your cash...

It's just a counter-question because it's related to the previous answer, that's why. Yeah.

Yeah.

Basically, your total RoE, what you're doing on your cash as well as on your assets, is 17 to 18%. Now, if you're making that good an RoE, why don't you deploy your cash into the business and give a better RoE?

Investors would be happy with dividend, of course, but point is, if you're giving a good RoE on the money which we are keeping in your company, I think that is good enough for us. Why distribute the entire cash and take debt and have that interest outgo?

That was just my thought process. Otherwise, it's...

Deepesh, I'll just address this. Basically, pharmaceutical industry for growth is not capital-intensive, it is brand-intensive.

Brand requires execution excellence at a field force level, which is what we are focused on. We do not require any capital beyond what we are spending in terms of growing our business.

Any use of real cash that we have is only for inorganic strategy and not otherwise. You're right that if we can generate 70 and 80% from our core business, but that is only working capital that is invested there.

By pumping in more working capital, I cannot grow the business. We can only grow faster than the market through better execution in the marketplace, which we are already focusing on.

Per se, capital is not required for the organic growth, it's only for inorganic growth. Keeping that cash at 7% in the bank pre-tax, I think defeats the objective.

Great, great, sir. Thank you so much, clears it.

Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you so much for taking my question, and congratulations on good numbers, sir.

My first question is that if you can break down your full year growth of 12.2% as per PharmaTrac between the four therapy segments, that'll be really helpful.

Therapy-wise, we are overweight on three therapies, which is gynae, ortho, and dermatology. Currently, off-hand, I won't be able to give you exact breakup between these three therapies.

While we don't have latest numbers, but roughly about half of our business is gynecology, 25-odd percent would be ortho, and another 10 to 15% will be derma.

10% roughly, yeah.

No, my question was more so on the growth, which business therapy is kind of driving that growth largely? It's

largely driven by number one, gynae, and number two is derma.

Okay. Sir, you talked about MR productivity.

Just a question on that. What is the MR count today, and what was the productivity, let's say, same quarter last year, and what was it in the fourth quarter?

Number of MRs continue to be same. There is no new addition of MR in the last quarter, which is under reference now.

Productivity, the growth that you're looking at is pure-play productivity improvement.

That

is existing MR.

Understood. Sir, in your presentation, there are a couple of lines mentioned about you launching or ideating 1 to 2 products every quarter.

How are we placed on that? What is the kind of new product launches that we've done in the fourth quarter?

What was it in the last whole year, and what are we planning for the next year?

We had total of six new product launches and three brand extensions. We intend to have similar number, approximately 9 to 10 in this current year as well, in which half of it will be more of rejuvenating the older brands, the legacy brand that we have.

Some brand extension in the same brands with a brand extension. There will be close to around five or six opportunities which will be in the new product therapies.

New product therapies or new products within the existing therapies?

New products with same therapies, our strength areas, which is gynae, ortho, and derma.

Understood. Great, sir.

I just wanted your breakup of the growth therapy-wise, maybe I'll take that offline. That's it from my side.

Thank you so much.

Sure.

Hello, sir, am I audible?

Yes.

My first question is on the gross margin side. As we can see QoQ this year, the gross margins have declined, and on the other hand, the other expenses have increased QoQ and YoY.

Is there a particular factor or is it fair to assume that these are the stable numbers going ahead?

You're referring to specific number of quarter four or...

Quarter four, sir.

No, are you referring to quarter four or for the full year? Because our full year gross margins are largely in line.

There has been minor change, but it is more than 64.2% versus 60, yeah,

20-30 bps,

which is just a product mix issue, nothing more than that. Right, right.

All right, sir. What about the other expenses part?

Other expenses, just a minute. Then other expenses also, if you look at, that has marginally increased, 30 bps.

That could be attributable to largely...

Largely these are a bit of timing issues.

Let me just give you an example. When do you conduct your cycle meeting, your annual cycle meeting, budget meeting?

Last year it might have happened in April, and this year it might have happened in March. On the size of our balance sheet of ₹1 crore, of our P&L, a ₹1 crore difference here and there makes a difference in the percentage.

Structurally, there is no increase in our cost structure beyond the normal inflation.

Sir. Got it.

Fair. My next question is on the guidance side.

Previously, our guidance had been of 12 to 14% on the top line and 100 to 150 basis points on the EBITDA margin level, where I see that this year has been a one-off year. Since our growth has been exceptionally well compared to the IPM data, is it fair to assume that we will be sticking to the earlier guidance going forward?

We had given the guidance, ma'am, if you remember, last quarter also we had clearly mentioned, and we repeat at the cost of repetition, we are certainly targeting a 1.5x of the pharma industry growth. Currently, the pharma industry is trending anywhere between 6-7% to 8-9%, this is a window in which it is operating.

If I calculate 1.5x of that, it translates to anywhere between 12% to 15% right now. As the scenario moves forward, because now you have some glut of launches into metabolics, anti-obesity, and things like that, obviously, the market is also expected, expected, I am repeating the word and underlining this word, expected to perform better.

We are saying even if we are not present in anti-obesity right now, our portfolio is strong enough to still beat the market and deliver 1.5x of the growth.

Sir. Got it.

Thank you, sir. That's it from my side.

Thank you.

Hi. Thank you for the opportunity.

Hi, team. Few questions from my side.

If we track the next two quarters, what quantitative thresholds, for example, MR productivity growth or volume growth, would kind of validate that this turnaround that we have reported in Q4 is on track versus slipping back to the industry-level growth? Any few, maybe two quantitative thresholds that we can actively monitor?

Hi, Sajal, very good afternoon to you. This is Amrut Medhekar.

Hi, Amrut.

Am I audible?

Yeah.

If you pick up of the last reported numbers of PharmaTrac, that is what we look at, or IQVIA also, almost similar numbers for the industry, I'll just break it down for you. Volume has been almost flat for the pharma industry on a moving annual total basis.

Yearly, the volumes have been almost flat. It ranges anywhere between 0.5% to 1.2-1.3% on a month-on-month basis.

The new product contribution is upward of 3%. The price growth is roughly around 5% plus.

Therefore, the annualized growth is roughly in the range of 7 to 9% month-on-month. Now, if you look at the JPL, which is Jagsonpal numbers, and look at PharmaTrac data only and try to mirror this, our volume growth is reflected as 2% there.

Our new products is matching the industry growth, which is 3% plus. Our price growth is little shade higher, which is at around 6.5 to 7% on the price side.

Overall, our reflection is showing as 12%. This is where the industry and Jagsonpal is, as far as the external reflections are considered.

Internally, we are certainly trying to beat these numbers also, Sajal. I think I had indicated to you on the same question last quarter as well, that we foresee, as you ask specifically for the next two quarters, I see same numbers getting even better.

No, definitely. We certainly hope for that, Amrut.

Thank you for answering that. Next question is, our top 10 brands today contribute about 58-60% of revenue, our top 10.

These have driven the recent recovery, obviously. Over the next two, three quarters, what specific indicators, such as growth contribution from the next 10 brands, to speak, new product revenue share, or reduction in top brand dependency, should we track to assess whether growth is broad-based rather than concentrated?

At what point would you consider the portfolio sufficiently diversified to sustain the aspirational 1.5x IPM growth without relying sort of disproportionately on few large brands?

Yes, yes. Sajal, this is industry-wide, I think, a very common question which comes across.

See, most of the industry, and especially the old organization, will have this legacy impact. You'll have some brands which are very old, but constituting a very large chunk of your top line.

Hence, it becomes very, very important for you to trend your line when you grow in your growth trajectory, that line has to be kind of managed very well. That you are not threatening your core brand, the volumes remain or rather grow, so that's your core engine, right?

That's going to funnel your growth or fund your growth, future growth, while new products will obviously accelerate that growth. Our focus will continue to be on our power brands, our core brands, which are kind of two or three brands each of the business unit or verticals, therapy verticals that we operate with.

That's where our majority of the resources will be deployed. At the same time, we are trying to build a portfolio which is future-growth-proof, meaning some of the products where we see next 10 years, 20 years growth, these are the products in which we have identified which are complementing our strength, and which possibly will have much better chance of success, Sajal.

As I rightly I think put the numbers to you, we are certainly looking at upward of 3% growth coming purely from these strong new product launches as well, while ensuring that our volume and price growth matches or betters the pharma industry.

That's helpful, Amrut. Lastly, we still of the view that the trade generics is not a competition as far as our business is concerned?

This lack of volume, which is an industry-wide phenomenon, it may or may not be partially, if not fully, linked to the trade generics growth, but that has nothing to do with any challenges that we see as on today?

Currently, none, because this is not a new phenomenon, Sajal. This is going on for almost a decade, and last five years, possibly it got little accelerated post-COVID scenario, wherein the generics had taken a front seat because of lot of Jan Aushadhi Kendras coming up, as well as generic businesses of the large pharma companies also trying to take away the market share.

None of these numbers are currently validated, Sejal. There's no custom report which is available, saying that generics is eating into the branded formulations.

Right? I am very sure the way we are operating today, we are able to drive volume growth, we are able to make new products successful, and we are also able to take premiumized pricing.

That also talks about our brand strength in clinic with the doctor's mind. Sure, sure.

No, that's helpful, Amrit. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Avnish Parman from Valkaria. Please go ahead.

Yeah. Hi, good afternoon.

Thanks for taking my question. I just had a question about the potential impact of whatever is happening in the Middle East.

If you can just outline whatever impact the business is facing. Also, if you can just touch upon, I guess that all your manufacturing is outsourced.

Are you having any kind of feedback from your CMO partners in terms of constraint on raw material supplies, be it API or solvent or packaging material? Yeah.

I will respond to it in two parts. Clearly, from a demand perspective, there's no impact of whatever is happening on the Middle East.

Okay?

The demand remains secular as far as the industry is concerned. Having said that, clearly there are certain pressures on the cost front, specially packaging material.

Clearly, all the vendors are seeing cost increases, and they obviously, while they are carrying certain inventories, that they will be looking to pass on some of the cost increases. Finally, I think all of us will find an equilibrium.

Having said that, I believe pharmaceutical industry overall will be lesser impacted given that the gross margins in this industry are better than most other industries. With 55 to 80% gross margins that most of the branded companies enjoy, I think our ability to take some of this cost increases are far superior.

We are also allowed a 10% price increase, some of it will get consumed within that price increase. All in all, yes, there will be cost impact.

Will it have any significant impact on the profitability of the company? I don't believe so.

Okay. Thanks, Manish.

Just a follow-up on that. Hypothetically speaking, let's say the API cost increases by, let's say, 20% for the CMO manufacturers.

I just wanted to have a sense on how the contracts are structured. Is all of that cost increase passed on to the marketing company or it's like a share of the pain kind of a system where some pain is shared by CMO guys and only a part of the pain is passed on to the marketing company?

How is it structured usually in the contract?

Thanks for this question. I'm sure you know that I also have a little bit of CMO background.

I actually worked

with CMO earlier on. Typically, the cost doesn't get as is transferred to a buyer or a client.

Depending on the structure of the agreement, it is typically absorbed over a period of time and in a staggered fashion as per your purchase orders. Because even your purchase orders are not there for every 15 days or every week.

Your purchase orders are also staggered over a quarter, and therefore, the absorption is also real-time as per the prices prevailing at that particular point of time when the purchase order is getting released. While we have a agreement which is longer-term in nature, the agreement also allows you time to absorb those increases over quarters.

It's not one quarter impact at all.

No, no, that's fine. I understand.

My question was that over time, is it completely passed on to the marketing company, which then passes on to the market by price increases, or some is absorbed by the CMO?

Even the price increases are normally not seen being permanent. They will also fall when the scale also happens for those molecules and the supply chains typically kind of smooths out.

Today what we are looking at supply chain constraints is less related to movement of the products, more related to the insurance cost. Typically, those will also drop down.

See,

just to further add on, see, finally, nobody will do business at a loss, right? We have to find a middle ground between the CMO and us, and also a middle ground between us and our customers.

Okay? Everyone absorbs what they can, everyone will pass on what they can, and a new equilibrium gets established.

Okay? Having said that, as I was mentioning, the overall cost in our scheme of things is not that significant as it is for many other industries.

Understood. Last question from my side.

You mentioned three of your dominant therapies, gynae, ortho, and derma. If you see in the last three, four months, IPM growth has kind of peaked at about, close, let's say 10-11%.

If you take a blended growth for these three strong therapies of yours, are these therapies on a blended basis going higher than IPM or lower than IPM?

No, they are in line with the IPM growth currently.

Okay. When you say you are going to grow at 1.5x of IPM, that also practically means that you're going at 1.5x of your covered market growth.

Correct to assume that?

Yes. Yes.

Okay. Thank you.

I'll get back in the queue.

Mr. Gupta, I'm trying to understand that what percentage of our revenue is coming from e-pharmacies, that is the online, Netmeds and 1mg, etc., and what are the terms of trades in terms of credit period, working capital, as well as margins?

Are they higher or lower versus the traditional our sales channel?

I'm sorry, I didn't get your name, please. Can you repeat?

My name is Madhur Rathi.

Mr. Rathi, thank you for this question.

Currently, the number is almost insignificant for us to have any mention of this in terms of supplies to these online pharmacies. However, the structure for every organization differs for these pharmacy chains.

Some of the supplies do happen from the authorized stockist in each and every warehouse of theirs as per the location, geographical location. Second is you also get into the rate contracts which are annual in nature for some of the products which are high prescription and high volumes.

Currently, we don't have, per se, a very high volume or value contribution from these e-pharmacies.

Understood. Also, when last did we take a price hike across our product portfolio, and what was the quantum of the price hike?

What is the average salary hike that we are looking on account of our MRs this year?

Madhur sir, in terms of exact percentage, I won't be able to share this because we are yet to close our appraisal cycles and KPI completions for the last FY. We are in that process, and while we conclude this, it will possibly be this quarter.

Second part of your question was that when the price increases will happen. Price increases will be SKU-based because as per 12 months, complete 12-month period gets over, then only one SKU is allowed for a price increase.

That's when we actually take as well. It all depends on how much inventory you have with you and how much is the need for the extra inventory to create a purchase order or to trigger a purchase order.

Right. Sir, just a final question.

Sir, if I look at our scale versus the size of the market, it's much larger in terms of, I think, SKU offerings as well. Our growth estimates of 1.5 times the market, are we being conservative in that in either new product addition or growing in these three segments of gynae, ortho, and dermatology?

Either in new product addition, are we being conservative because 1.5, because our scale is not whatever the market, our scale is not that high.

I am not able to hear you clearly, but I can possibly sense what you wanted to ask.

I'll repeat my question, sir.

I'll just answer that. See, our market, as we said, is I think Manish ji has already elaborated those numbers to you.

One is the earlier question which you asked about the price increase. Our 92% of the portfolio is outside the NLEM, which is price control.

Almost you can say 90% of my portfolio, I can go up to a price increase of 9.9%. Second part that you asked the question is whether our participated market or covered market is big enough to drive our growth upward of 1.5x.

Is my question understood correctly?

Yes, sir. Also on the new product addition, because versus the target market and product addition can be much faster, so,

yeah. Correct.

We are trying to rejuvenate that. As I mentioned in my opening remarks as well, we are trying to rejuvenate our portfolio, but obviously, we are working with a specialty segment where prescription pickup doesn't happen from day one.

New product establishment is a very, very hard work for prescriptions to start flowing in from each and every pincode of the country, which will take possibly a year plus for us to do that. That's what we are working on the new product addition.

As I mentioned, as per PharmaTrac, we are matching or doing better than the pharma industry in terms of our new product performance. We are already at 3% plus in terms of our growth contribution from the new products, and we are trying to further accelerate that.

Got it. Sir, that was from my end.

Thank you so much and all the best.

Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon. Can you break your Q4 FY '26 and FY '26 growth in price, volume, and new products?

I'll give you the breakup for Q4 which you're asking. For us, volume growth was almost in line with the market.

I'll give you the PharmaTrac numbers, how they're reflected. Unfortunately, I don't have the quarter right now, I have the year.

Can I give you for the year right now?

Yes, that is fine.

I've given it earlier, I repeat it. For the Indian pharma market, the volume growth has been approximately 1%, little less than 1%.

New products has been little higher than 3%, it was around 3.1. Price is little less than 5, it was around 4.8.

Sum total of this is around 8.5. If you round it off, it will become 9%, okay?

Now, for Jagsonpal, the numbers reported are volume growth is 2%, new products is matching, which is 3.2%, and our price growth is in the range of 6 to 7%. Sum total of this comes to 12%.

Got it. Great.

That's it from my end.

Hi, sir. I hope I'm audible.

Sir, I missed this our new product pipeline, which therapeutics you said those molecules will be?

The molecules you will possibly come to know in a month's time, but we are looking at some good breakthrough molecules, and hopefully, we'll be in the second wave of launch for this first-in-India product. We are good, we are preparing ourselves for gynecology, one therapy; second, obviously, we are looking at ortho and derma.

You will come to know about this. We'll make an announcement at the opportune time, mostly either May end or June first week.

Got it, sir. Sir, on the MR efficiency that you're working on, these new products, I assume, will be aligned and that will help us increase the efficiency of our field force, because if my understanding is correct, there were some churning issues and you're trying to tackle that and improve the efficiency from our field forces.

I assume all the new products will be aligned and that would be helpful to increase or manage the productivity.

Yes, absolutely. As I said, there is one upskilling workshop which has happened.

There is a very good product and therapy training which was given to all the MRs. We're also looking at the talent improvement within the organization so that all the promotions also happen internally as a policy for the organization.

While we try to blend with the external hiring in case we are not able to find anybody internally for a new position. The third piece that we are working on is whether the geography in which we are operating, we are able to get more productivity.

We are not adding any geographies, we are not adding any new MR, but we are trying to see whether organically from the same geography, we are able to extract more. Thereby, conserving our cost as well.

Got it. That would have any implications on our incremental cost, margins, or working capital, all these initiatives?

No, not at all.

Any implications on our operating cost and/or working capital?

No. See,

as you would have noticed, we are already working on a very lean working capital, 11 days, and this has been consistent for two years now. We believe we are best in class as far as working capital management is concerned, and we intend to stay that way.

Got it, sir. Sir, final one on the capital return policy.

I see that the strategy seems to be we want to return back higher dividend or share buyback and so that our net cash kind of remains below ₹200 CR. Is that understanding correct?

We will continue to do that. We're generating healthy cash flow, we don't want to kind of keep surplus cash over ₹200 CR.

That...

I don't think we have a number in mind, but yes, we believe with the robustness of our cash flows, which continues, we have adequate cash currently. Even what we are paying out through both buyback and/or enhanced dividend will fully get recouped within the year itself.

You can arrive at the number, but yes, we believe that the current cash position of the company is more than sufficient to fulfill any inorganic initiatives that we may need to undertake.

Got it, sir. Thank you, sir, and all the best.

Thanks.

Hi. Thank you for the follow-up.

Sir, just on the top 10 brands, if you can call out what the growth has been for those top 10 brands on a basket level, and what has been the growth for the tail-end brand, which is the rest 40% of the business?

Can you repeat the question, Anupam? The line wasn't too good when you spoke.

I'm asking the top 10 brands which contribute 58% to your revenue, what was the growth in those 10 brands, and what was the growth in the balance 42% of the business?

It's almost in line. Top 10 brands are obviously constituting much more healthier bottom line for us, our growth on those brands has been in line with rest of the portfolio.

There's hardly 1% change.

I think we'll arrive at the right number because we have not added the numbers and seen it. We'll come back, but it won't be very, very different.

Understood. Sir, do you have different divisions for each of these therapies in terms of MRs or are they integrated internally?

Your voice is not very clear at all. Can you please repeat this or maybe a little bit away from the mic?

I think it's getting smudged.

Am I audible now, sir?

Yes, you're audible, sir.

I was asking in terms of your MR productivities between the three therapy segments, the MRs are working in terms of divisions or separate independent division by itself?

No, no.

Can you hear me now, sir?

No.

I'll repeat the question, Anupam, just tell me yes or no. You asked me whether the three therapies have separate divisions and whether we are growing equal, something like that?

Yes.

All three businesses are independent. We are trying to have a character around those businesses.

One is a clear-cut gynae business, which has absolutely no confusion. Entire portfolio is pure-play gynae.

Second business is what we are trying to build up is around orthopedics, which doesn't have all pure-play orthopedic brands currently. Third business is against purely a derma-focused business.

Derma-focused, gynae-focused is absolutely there in place, while the third vehicle, which is still to be build or work in progress, you can say, is a ortho franchise, which will happen as the quarter progresses over next couple of quarters. All the three engines will fire equally well, I'm confident about it, for contributing towards the profitable growth for the organization.

Got it. Sir, last question, if I may.

Can you quantify in absolute figure what is the MR productivity for each of these three business segments?

I won't be able to give you exact numbers there for each of these businesses in terms of productivity. However, I can promise you one thing that the growth will be entirely driven with the productivity improvement, as we don't intend to increase the MR numbers currently or managers numbers currently.

Manpower remaining same, our growth will be still higher than the IPM.

Can you rank them in what is highest in terms of MR productivity between one...

Gynae will be highest, number one. Ortho will be number two.

Number three will be derma.

Got it. Thank you so much.

That's it from my side.

Thank you so much. Thank you.

Hi, just one clarification. The number you mentioned for Jagsonpal of 12% versus the reported number of 7%, this is the lead-lag in the data reported in PharmaTrac that's the only difference there, right?

Correct, correct. You're right.

Great.

These are the reported numbers in the PharmaTrac external audit for the pharma industry as well as Jagsonpal.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you all participants for your valuable questions and engagement. We appreciate your interest in Jagsonpal.

Should you have any further queries or any requirement of additional information, please do not hesitate to contact our IR team at Go India Advisors. We remain committed to engaging with all of you, fostering transparent communication as we continue advancing our objectives of creating value for our shareholders.

Thank you once again for your participation and wishing you a very good evening. Thank you.