Boston Scientific halves expected tariff hit
By the numbers
Q2 sales: $5.06 billion
22.8% growth year over year
Cardiovascular sales: $3.35 billion
26.8% growth year over year
Electrophysiology: $840 million
96.1% growth year over year
Boston Scientific on Wednesday halved its expected tariff charge for the year, following other medtech companies that have cut outlooks on financial impacts from the Trump administration's policies.
CFO Jonathan Monson told investors during a second-quarter earnings call that the company now expects a tariff charge of approximately $100 million. Boston Scientific forecast a charge of approximately $200 million during a first-quarter call in April; however, the company signaled at an investor event in May that it would likely update its forecast.
Boston Scientific is the latest medtech firm to lower expected costs related to tariffs after companies across the industry projected that they would absorb hundreds of millions of dollars in additional costs during first-quarter earnings calls. Johnson & Johnson similarly halved its expected hit to $200 million, exclusively related to the company's medtech business, and Abbott said last week that it expects a $200 million charge, compared with a charge of 'a few hundred million.'
The company expects the $100 million impact to predominantly take hold in the second half of the year.
Boston Scientific increased its full-year sales guidance as part of the company's earnings release. It now expects sales growth for the year in a range of 18% to 19%, compared with a prior range of 15% to 17%.
PFA success continues
Boston Scientific reported another strong quarter for its electrophysiology group as pulsed field ablation devices continue to boost companies' portfolios.
While not the triple-digit growth Boston Scientific has reported in prior quarters, its electrophysiology group still grew by 96% year over year to $840 million. Boston Scientific is growing the use of its Farapulse PFA system in new markets like Japan and China.
CEO Mike Mahoney told investors that Boston Scientific was third to market in Japan, specifically, but is now the 'clear market leader' in the country. Mahoney added that the company is also in the 'very, very early days' in China and is placing a lot of emphasis on what could be a large market opportunity.
The CEO also emphasized that Boston Scientific is growing its future PFA offerings through internal investment, as well as through its venture capital portfolio and partnerships. The company also recently won an expanded indication for Farapulse in people with persistent atrial fibrillation, when an abnormal heart rhythm continues for at least seven days, widening the pool of patients who are eligible for treatment.
Boston Scientific's continued success comes amid a reignited race for market share in the PFA space. The new atrial fibrillation treatment is quickly overtaking traditional treatments like cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation.
Johnson & Johnson reported last week that its electrophysiology business returned to growth in the second quarter, largely due to further PFA adoption. The unit grew year over year by 11%.
Tim Schmid, J&J's worldwide chairman of medtech, told investors on an earnings call that the company is not 'rolling over' when it comes to electrophysiology.
'Given that we created the [electrophysiology] category, for us, this one is very personal,' Schmid said. 'And while I know that several analysts were quick to write us off earlier this year, we continue to remain very confident in our ability to retain our global market leadership position over the long term.'
Mahoney, on Wednesday's call, was similarly bullish on Boston Scientific's ambitions in electrophysiology.
'We not only want to be the clear leader [in] PFA,' Mahoney said, 'but our aim is to be the overall leader in [electrophysiology] in the future.'
Recommended Reading
'We are not rolling over': J&J electrophysiology unit rebounds amid PFA rivalry
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Those who invested in Multi-Chem (SGX:AWZ) five years ago are up 457%
When you buy shares in a company, it's worth keeping in mind the possibility that it could fail, and you could lose your money. But on a lighter note, a good company can see its share price rise well over 100%. Long term Multi-Chem Limited (SGX:AWZ) shareholders would be well aware of this, since the stock is up 276% in five years. It's down 2.1% in the last seven days. Let's take a look at the underlying fundamentals over the longer term, and see if they've been consistent with shareholders returns. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. While the efficient markets hypothesis continues to be taught by some, it has been proven that markets are over-reactive dynamic systems, and investors are not always rational. One imperfect but simple way to consider how the market perception of a company has shifted is to compare the change in the earnings per share (EPS) with the share price movement. During five years of share price growth, Multi-Chem achieved compound earnings per share (EPS) growth of 32% per year. This EPS growth is remarkably close to the 30% average annual increase in the share price. That suggests that the market sentiment around the company hasn't changed much over that time. Rather, the share price has approximately tracked EPS growth. The graphic below depicts how EPS has changed over time (unveil the exact values by clicking on the image). We consider it positive that insiders have made significant purchases in the last year. Having said that, most people consider earnings and revenue growth trends to be a more meaningful guide to the business. This free interactive report on Multi-Chem's earnings, revenue and cash flow is a great place to start, if you want to investigate the stock further. What About Dividends? When looking at investment returns, it is important to consider the difference between total shareholder return (TSR) and share price return. Whereas the share price return only reflects the change in the share price, the TSR includes the value of dividends (assuming they were reinvested) and the benefit of any discounted capital raising or spin-off. Arguably, the TSR gives a more comprehensive picture of the return generated by a stock. In the case of Multi-Chem, it has a TSR of 457% for the last 5 years. That exceeds its share price return that we previously mentioned. This is largely a result of its dividend payments! A Different Perspective Multi-Chem's TSR for the year was broadly in line with the market average, at 29%. It has to be noted that the recent return falls short of the 41% shareholders have gained each year, over half a decade. Although the share price growth has slowed, the longer term story points to a business well worth watching. It's always interesting to track share price performance over the longer term. But to understand Multi-Chem better, we need to consider many other factors. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for Multi-Chem you should know about. Multi-Chem is not the only stock insiders are buying. So take a peek at this free list of small cap companies at attractive valuations which insiders have been buying. Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on Singaporean exchanges. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Those who invested in Multi-Chem (SGX:AWZ) five years ago are up 457%
When you buy shares in a company, it's worth keeping in mind the possibility that it could fail, and you could lose your money. But on a lighter note, a good company can see its share price rise well over 100%. Long term Multi-Chem Limited (SGX:AWZ) shareholders would be well aware of this, since the stock is up 276% in five years. It's down 2.1% in the last seven days. Let's take a look at the underlying fundamentals over the longer term, and see if they've been consistent with shareholders returns. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. While the efficient markets hypothesis continues to be taught by some, it has been proven that markets are over-reactive dynamic systems, and investors are not always rational. One imperfect but simple way to consider how the market perception of a company has shifted is to compare the change in the earnings per share (EPS) with the share price movement. During five years of share price growth, Multi-Chem achieved compound earnings per share (EPS) growth of 32% per year. This EPS growth is remarkably close to the 30% average annual increase in the share price. That suggests that the market sentiment around the company hasn't changed much over that time. Rather, the share price has approximately tracked EPS growth. The graphic below depicts how EPS has changed over time (unveil the exact values by clicking on the image). We consider it positive that insiders have made significant purchases in the last year. Having said that, most people consider earnings and revenue growth trends to be a more meaningful guide to the business. This free interactive report on Multi-Chem's earnings, revenue and cash flow is a great place to start, if you want to investigate the stock further. What About Dividends? When looking at investment returns, it is important to consider the difference between total shareholder return (TSR) and share price return. Whereas the share price return only reflects the change in the share price, the TSR includes the value of dividends (assuming they were reinvested) and the benefit of any discounted capital raising or spin-off. Arguably, the TSR gives a more comprehensive picture of the return generated by a stock. In the case of Multi-Chem, it has a TSR of 457% for the last 5 years. That exceeds its share price return that we previously mentioned. This is largely a result of its dividend payments! A Different Perspective Multi-Chem's TSR for the year was broadly in line with the market average, at 29%. It has to be noted that the recent return falls short of the 41% shareholders have gained each year, over half a decade. Although the share price growth has slowed, the longer term story points to a business well worth watching. It's always interesting to track share price performance over the longer term. But to understand Multi-Chem better, we need to consider many other factors. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for Multi-Chem you should know about. Multi-Chem is not the only stock insiders are buying. So take a peek at this free list of small cap companies at attractive valuations which insiders have been buying. Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on Singaporean exchanges. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio
Los Angeles Times
41 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump voters wanted relief from Medical bills. For millions, the bills are about to get bigger
President Trump rode to reelection last fall on voter concerns about prices. But as his administration pares back federal rules and programs designed to protect patients from the high cost of health care, Trump risks pushing more Americans into debt, further straining family budgets already stressed by medical bills. Millions of people are expected to lose health insurance in the coming years as a result of the tax cut legislation Trump signed this month, leaving them with fewer protections from large bills if they get sick or suffer an accident. At the same time, significant increases in health plan premiums on state insurance marketplaces next year will likely push more Americans to either drop coverage or switch to higher-deductible plans that will require them to pay more out-of-pocket before their insurance kicks in. Smaller changes to federal rules are poised to bump up patients' bills, as well. New federal guidelines for COVID -19 vaccines, for example, will allow health insurers to stop covering the shots for millions, so if patients want the protection, some may have to pay out-of-pocket. The new tax cut legislation will also raise the cost of certain doctor visits, requiring copays of up to $35 for some Medicaid enrollees. And for those who do end up in debt, there will be fewer protections. This month, the Trump administration secured permission from a federal court to roll back regulations that would have removed medical debt from consumer credit reports. That puts Americans who cannot pay their medical bills at risk of lower credit scores, hindering their ability to get a loan or forcing them to pay higher interest rates. 'For tens of millions of Americans, balancing the budget is like walking a tightrope,' said Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. 'The Trump administration is just throwing them off.' White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to questions about how the administration's health care policies will affect Americans' medical bills. The president and his Republican congressional allies have brushed off the health care cuts, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid retrenchment in the mammoth tax law. 'You won't even notice it,' Trump said at the White House after the bill signing July 4. 'Just waste, fraud, and abuse.' But consumer and patient advocates around the country warn that the erosion of federal health care protections since Trump took office in January threatens to significantly undermine Americans' financial security. 'These changes will hit our communities hard,' said Arika Sánchez, who oversees health care policy at the nonprofit New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. Sánchez predicted many more people the center works with will end up with medical debt. 'When families get stuck with medical debt, it hurts their credit scores, makes it harder to get a car, a home, or even a job,' she said. 'Medical debt wrecks people's lives.' For Americans with serious illnesses such as cancer, weakened federal protections from medical debt pose yet one more risk, said Elizabeth Darnall, senior director of federal advocacy at the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network. 'People will not seek out the treatment they need,' she said. Trump promised a rosier future while campaigning last year, pledging to 'make America affordable again' and 'expand access to new Affordable Healthcare.' Polls suggest voters were looking for relief. About 6 in 10 adults — Democrats and Republicans — say they are worried about being able to afford health care, according to one recent survey, outpacing concerns about the cost of food or housing. And medical debt remains a widespread problem: As many as 100 million adults in the U.S. are burdened by some kind of health care debt. Despite this, key tools that have helped prevent even more Americans from sinking into debt are now on the chopping block. Medicaid and other government health insurance programs, in particular, have proved to be a powerful economic backstop for low-income patients and their families, said Kyle Caswell, an economist at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. Caswell and other researchers found, for example, that Medicaid expansion made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act led to measurable declines in medical debt and improvements in consumers' credit scores in states that implemented the expansion. 'We've seen that these programs have a meaningful impact on people's financial well-being,' Caswell said. Trump's tax law — which will slash more than $1 trillion in federal health spending over the next decade, mostly through Medicaid cuts — is expected to leave 10 million more people without health coverage by 2034, according to the latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The tax cuts, which primarily benefit wealthy Americans, will add $3.4 trillion to U.S. deficits over a decade, the office calculated. The number of uninsured could spike further if Trump and his congressional allies don't renew additional federal subsidies for low- and moderate-income Americans who buy health coverage on state insurance marketplaces. This aid — enacted under former President Joe Biden — lowers insurance premiums and reduces medical bills enrollees face when they go to the doctor or the hospital. But unless congressional Republicans act, those subsidies will expire later this year, leaving many with bigger bills. Federal debt regulations developed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the Biden administration would have protected these people and others if they couldn't pay their medical bills. The agency issued rules in January that would have removed medical debts from consumer credit reports. That would have helped an estimated 15 million people. But the Trump administration chose not to defend the new regulations when they were challenged in court by debt collectors and the credit bureaus, who argued the federal agency had exceeded its authority in issuing the rules. A federal judge in Texas appointed by Trump ruled that the regulation should be scrapped. Levey writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.
