GoodRx Holdings, Inc. (GDRX) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the GoodRx first-quarter 2026 earnings call. As a reminder, today's conference call is being recorded. I would now like to introduce your host for today's call, Aubrey Reynolds, Director of Investor Relations. Ms. Reynolds, you may begin.

各位女士、先生，感謝您稍候，歡迎參加 GoodRx 2026 年第一季財報電話會議。提醒各位，今天的電話會議將被錄音。現在我想介紹今天會議的主持人：投資人關係總監 Aubrey Reynolds。Reynolds 女士，您可以開始了。

Thank you, operator. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to GoodRx's earnings conference call for the first-quarter 2026. Joining me today are Wendy Barnes, our Chief Executive Officer; and Chris McGinnis, our Chief Financial Officer.

謝謝，接線員。各位早安，歡迎參加 GoodRx 2026 年第一季財報電話會議。今天與我一同出席的有我們的執行長 Wendy Barnes，以及我們的財務長 Chris McGinnis。

Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that this call will contain forward-looking statements. All statements made on this call that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including without limitation, statements regarding management's plans, strategies, goals and objectives, our market opportunity, our anticipated financial performance, underlying trends in our business and industry, including ongoing changes in the pharmacy ecosystem, our value proposition, our long-term growth prospects, our direct and hybrid contracting approach, collaborations and partnerships with third parties, including our point-of-sale cash programs and our integrated savings program, our e-commerce strategy, and our capital allocation priorities.

在開始之前，我想提醒各位，本次電話會議將包含前瞻性陳述。本次電話會議中所有不涉及歷史事實的陳述，均應被視為前瞻性陳述，包括但不限於：關於管理層的計畫、策略、目標與目的；我們的市場機會；我們預期的財務表現；我們業務與產業的基本趨勢（包括藥局生態系持續變化）；我們的價值主張；我們的長期成長前景；我們的直接與混合式簽約方式；與第三方的協作與合作夥伴關係（包括我們的銷售點現金方案與整合式省錢方案）；我們的電商策略；以及我們的資本配置優先順序。

These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other important factors. These factors, including the factors discussed in the Risk Factors section of our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, could cause actual results, performance, or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements made on this call. Any such forward-looking statements represent management's estimates as of the date of this call, and we disclaim any obligation to update these statements, even if subsequent events, calls are used to change.

這些陳述既非承諾亦非保證，而是涉及已知與未知的風險、不確定性及其他重要因素。這些因素（包括我們截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日止年度 Form 10-K 年報「風險因素」章節所討論的因素，以及我們向美國證券交易委員會提交的其他文件中所載者）可能導致實際結果、表現或成就與本次電話會議中前瞻性陳述所明示或暗示者存在重大差異。任何此類前瞻性陳述均代表管理層截至本次電話會議日期的估計；即使後續事件、電話會議被用來改變，我們亦不承擔更新這些陳述的任何義務。

In addition, we will be referencing certain non-GAAP metrics in today's remarks. We have reconciled each non-GAAP metric to the nearest GAAP metric in the company's earnings press release, which can be found on the overview page of our Investor Relations website at investors.goodrx.com. I'd also like to remind everyone that a replay of this call will become available there shortly as well.

此外，我們在今天的發言中將引用若干非 GAAP 指標。我們已在公司財報新聞稿中將每一項非 GAAP 指標與最接近的 GAAP 指標進行調節，該新聞稿可於我們投資人關係網站 investors.goodrx.com 的總覽頁面查閱。我也想提醒各位，本次電話會議的重播不久後也將在該網站提供。

With that, I'll turn it over to Wendy.

接下來我把時間交給 Wendy。

Thank you, Aubrey, and thank you to everyone for joining us today. We delivered a strong first quarter with performance driven by continued momentum across our strategic growth priorities. We are seeing strength in revenue, disciplined execution on profitability, and healthy engagement across the platform. Overall, we feel confident these results validate that the strategy we laid out last quarter is working and that we are building a sustainable value proposition designed to deliver resilient, long-term growth.

謝謝你，Aubrey，也感謝各位今天加入我們。我們第一季交出強勁成績，表現主要來自我們策略性成長優先事項的持續動能。我們看到營收表現強勁、獲利能力上執行嚴謹，且平台整體互動維持健康。整體而言，我們有信心這些結果驗證了我們上季提出的策略正在奏效，也顯示我們正在打造一個可持續的價值主張，以帶來具韌性、長期的成長。

That momentum is coming from the parts of the business we've been investing in. Pharma Direct continues to scale, supported by strong demand for manufacturer-sponsored pricing programs and continued momentum in GLP-1 access. Our subscription offerings, led by GoodRx for weight loss, are growing and driving deeper consumer engagement. And Rx Marketplace is delivering performance in line with internal expectations, supported by the continued expansion of our e-commerce footprint and the strength of our direct contracting model.

這股動能來自我們持續投入的業務領域。Pharma Direct 在製藥商贊助的定價方案強勁需求，以及 GLP-1 可近性持續提升的支持下，持續擴張規模。我們的訂閱型產品（以 GoodRx 減重方案為首）正在成長，並帶動更深度的消費者互動。而 Rx Marketplace 的表現符合內部預期，受惠於我們電商版圖的持續擴張，以及直接簽約模式的優勢。

At the same time, the broader healthcare environment is evolving in ways that align with our strategy and create meaningful opportunities for us to capture additional value. Coverage gaps are widening, out-of-pocket costs remain elevated, more Americans are finding themselves uninsured, and consumers are demanding greater transparency in how medications are priced and accessed.

同時，整體醫療保健環境正以與我們策略一致的方向演進，並為我們創造可觀的機會以擷取更多價值。保障缺口正在擴大、自付費用仍居高不下、更多美國人發現自己沒有保險，而消費者也要求在藥品定價與取得方式上有更高的透明度。

As a result, affordability is becoming a more central factor earlier in the patient journey, with consumers and providers actively evaluating cost before prescribing and filling, pharmaceutical manufacturers accelerating direct-to-consumer strategies, employers looking for new ways to support high-cost therapies, and pharmacies adapting to more transparent, digitally-driven models of fulfillment. As these dynamics evolve, how affordability is presented and experienced by consumers is becoming increasingly important, shaping not just awareness, but whether patients ultimately move forward with treatment.

因此，可負擔性在病患旅程更早期就成為更核心的因素：消費者與醫療提供者在開立處方與領藥前會主動評估成本；製藥商加速推動直接面向消費者（DTC）的策略；雇主尋求新方法以支持高成本療法；而藥局也在調整以因應更透明、數位驅動的履約模式。隨著這些動態演變，消費者如何看到並體驗可負擔性變得愈發重要，這不僅影響認知，也影響病患最終是否會繼續接受治療。

GoodRx is well-positioned to respond to these changes. Over the past several years, we have been focused on evolving our platform from an affordability destination into a true access infrastructure. We have built a digital storefront where consumers can easily understand pricing across generics and brands and access those options through a more integrated experience.

GoodRx 已做好充分準備來回應這些變化。過去幾年，我們一直專注於將平台從「可負擔性目的地」演進為真正的「可近性基礎設施」。我們打造了一個數位店面，讓消費者能輕鬆理解學名藥與品牌藥的價格，並透過更整合的體驗取得這些選項。

At the same time, we have developed the underlying capabilities that allow manufacturers to leverage our platform to deliver self-pay programs directly to consumers at scale. This is expanding the role GoodRx plays in the prescription journey and positioning us to be at the center of how medications are evaluated, accessed, and filled.

同時，我們也建立了底層能力，使製藥商能運用我們的平台，將自費方案以規模化方式直接提供給消費者。這正在擴大 GoodRx 在處方旅程中的角色，並使我們得以站在藥品如何被評估、取得與配藥的核心位置。

With that, I'll walk through our business updates, starting with Pharma Direct. GoodRx Pharma Direct continues to be a key growth engine for the business. In Q1, Pharma Direct saw 82% growth year over year, reflecting continued expansion of manufacturer-sponsored pricing programs on our platform. We now have more than 125 self-pay programs live, reinforcing the growing role GoodRx plays in enabling modern pharmaceutical access.

接下來我將說明我們的業務更新，先從 Pharma Direct 開始。GoodRx Pharma Direct 仍是公司重要的成長引擎。第一季，Pharma Direct 年增 82%，反映出我們平台上製藥商贊助定價方案的持續擴張。目前我們已有超過 125 個自費方案上線，進一步強化 GoodRx 在推動現代化藥品可近性方面日益重要的角色。

A key driver of momentum in the quarter was our continued support of highly anticipated GLP-1 launches and expansions. Since the start of the year, we have helped enable access to Ozempic Pill, Wegovy HD, Wegovy Pill, Foundayo, and Zepbound KwikPens. To provide a sense of the scale we are driving, a third-party source indicates that we accounted for approximately one-third of all Wegovy Pill transactions in the first two months post-launch. This reinforces the increasingly central role GoodRx plays in helping manufacturers bring therapies directly to the patients who need them, with transparent pricing and broad pharmacy access from day one.

本季動能的一項關鍵驅動因素，是我們持續支持備受期待的 GLP-1 新品上市與適用範圍擴大。自今年年初以來，我們已協助促成 Ozempic Pill、Wegovy HD、Wegovy Pill、Foundayo 與 Zepbound KwikPens 的可近性。為了讓各位了解我們推動的規模，第三方資料來源指出，在上市後前兩個月，我們約占所有 Wegovy Pill 交易量的三分之一。這再次證明 GoodRx 在協助製藥商自第一天起以透明定價與廣泛藥局可近性，將療法直接帶給有需要病患方面，扮演愈來愈核心的角色。

Beyond GLP-1s, we are continuing to expand Pharma Direct across therapeutic areas and program types. In the quarter, we announced a collaboration with Viatris to support savings availability for 17 of its established brand medications. We also introduced significant discounts from Pfizer on more than 30 of its essential medications, spanning women's health, migraine, arthritis, and rare disease, made available through a dedicated Pfizer-branded storefront on GoodRx and on TrumpRx as part of our integration.

除了 GLP-1 之外，我們也持續將 Pharma Direct 擴展至更多治療領域與方案類型。本季我們宣布與 Viatris 合作，支援其 17 項既有品牌藥物的省錢優惠可用性。我們也推出 Pfizer 對其超過 30 項必需藥物提供的大幅折扣，涵蓋女性健康、偏頭痛、關節炎與罕見疾病；並透過 GoodRx 上的 Pfizer 品牌專屬店面，以及作為我們整合一部分在 TrumpRx 上提供。

As these programs scale, our focus is shifting from launch to how affordability is surfaced and discovered by consumers. In response, we are developing new ways for manufacturers to engage patients on GoodRx. Branded storefronts are a key example, providing a simple, trusted entry point for consumers, turning to explore a manufacturer's full portfolio of savings in one place.

隨著這些方案規模化，我們的重點正從「上市」轉向「消費者如何看到並發現可負擔性」。因此，我們正在開發新的方式，讓製藥商能在 GoodRx 上與病患互動。品牌專屬店面就是一個關鍵例子，為消費者提供簡單、可信賴的入口，讓他們能在同一處探索某製藥商完整的省錢方案組合。

And when manufacturers leverage GoodRx as a channel, those programs are available across our nationwide pharmacy network, supporting broad consumer choice and convenient access. We believe this model represents a more cohesive and consumer-friendly way to present affordability offerings at scale.

而當製藥商將 GoodRx 作為通路時，這些方案可在我們全國性的藥局網路中使用，支持消費者廣泛選擇與便利取得。我們相信，這種模式代表一種更一致、也更以消費者為中心的方式，能以規模化呈現可負擔性方案。

We are also seeing encouraging traction from TrumpRx, where GoodRx enables pricing for many of the brands available on the platform. Early data shows strong demand concentrated in GLP-1 therapies, and importantly, the volume appears to be incremental, expanding access to new patients rather than shifting existing demand. That is a meaningful signal for manufacturers and reinforces the value of transparent pricing delivered through consumer channels.

我們也看到 TrumpRx 出現令人鼓舞的進展，GoodRx 為該平台上許多品牌提供定價支援。初期數據顯示需求強勁，且主要集中在 GLP-1 療法；更重要的是，該交易量看起來是增量，代表是在擴大新病患的可近性，而非移轉既有需求。這對製藥商而言是重要訊號，也再次強化透過消費者通路提供透明定價的價值。

Overall, Pharma Direct is evolving GoodRx beyond a pricing solution into a broader consumer access platform for pharmaceutical manufacturers, enabling them to reach patients directly, convert clinically appropriate demand, and deliver pricing seamlessly at the pharmacy counter.

整體而言，Pharma Direct 正推動 GoodRx 從單純的定價解決方案，演進為面向製藥商的更廣泛消費者可近性平台，使其能直接觸及病患、轉化臨床上適當的需求，並在藥局櫃檯無縫提供定價。

Now, diving into Rx Marketplace. In Q1, Rx Marketplace delivered steady prescription transaction performance that was in line with internal expectations, supported by continued operational execution across the business. Monthly active consumers were flat quarter over quarter, reinforcing consistent engagement on the platform.

現在，深入說明 Rx Marketplace。在第一季，Rx Marketplace 的處方交易表現穩健，符合內部預期，並受惠於全業務持續的營運執行。每月活躍消費者數與前一季持平，進一步印證平台互動的一致性。

Following significant expansion of our e-commerce retail network late last year, Q1 performance demonstrated the scalability of our model with both order volume and total claims more than doubling quarter over quarter. As more consumers seek convenient digital ways to access medication, expanding our e-commerce capabilities remains an important part of improving the GoodRx experience and capturing a greater share of the prescription journey.

在去年年底我們大幅擴張電商零售網路之後，第一季的表現展現了我們模式的可擴展性，訂單量與總理賠件數較前一季皆增加逾一倍。隨著更多消費者尋求便利的數位方式取得藥品，擴展我們的電商能力仍是提升 GoodRx 體驗、並在處方旅程中取得更大份額的重要一環。

At the same time, we continue to make progress on strategic initiatives designed to strengthen the long-term economics of the marketplace. This includes advancing direct retailer agreements. We have direct contracts in place with nine of our top 10 retail pharmacies nationwide and enhancing our pricing capabilities, including partnerships that enable Pharma Direct net pricing claims to be delivered directly at the pharmacy counter. These initiatives improve the consumer experience, create operational efficiencies for retailers, and support healthier marketplace economics over time.

同時，我們也持續推進旨在強化市場長期經濟性的策略性計畫。其中包括推動與零售商的直接合作協議。我們已與全美前十大零售藥局中的九家簽訂直接合約，並強化我們的定價能力，包括透過合作夥伴關係，使 Pharma Direct 的淨價理賠可在藥局櫃檯直接提供。這些措施可改善消費者體驗、為零售商創造營運效率，並隨時間推進支持更健康的市場經濟性。

Turning to subscriptions, which is a key growth priority for the business. In Q1, our subscription offerings continue to scale and the number of subscription plans return to year-over-year growth, driven by purposeful investment, growing consumer adoption, and continued expansion across our condition-specific programs. We are seeing increasing engagement as more consumers choose GoodRx, not just for savings, but as a more integrated way to access and manage their care.

接著談訂閱服務，這是公司關鍵的成長優先事項。在第一季，我們的訂閱產品持續擴張，訂閱方案數量恢復年增成長，動能來自有目的的投資、消費者採用提升，以及我們在各項特定疾病方案上的持續擴展。隨著更多消費者選擇 GoodRx，不僅為了省錢，也作為更整合的方式來取得並管理其照護，我們看到互動程度持續提升。

GoodRx for weight loss remains the primary driver of momentum within this category. Since our last call, we expanded the platform to support all available FDA-approved GLP-1 therapies, with the Wegovy Pill performing particularly well since launching at the start of the year.

在此類別中，GoodRx 減重方案仍是推動動能的主要驅動力。自上次電話會議以來，我們擴展平台以支援所有可用的 FDA 核准 GLP-1 療法，其中 Wegovy Pill 自年初推出以來表現尤其亮眼。

More broadly, our weight loss offering continues to demonstrate the value of the integrated experience we are building. By combining clinical care, transparent self-pay pricing, and broad pharmacy availability, we are creating a seamless path for evaluation to therapy initiation, helping consumers easily start and stay on treatment. Beyond weight loss, our ED and hair loss offerings continue to contribute to growth, while also demonstrating the broader applicability of our subscription model across additional conditions.

更廣泛而言，我們的減重產品持續展現我們正在打造的整合式體驗之價值。透過結合臨床照護、透明的自費定價，以及廣泛的藥局可近性，我們正在打造從評估到啟動治療的無縫流程，協助消費者更容易開始並持續治療。除減重之外，我們的 ED 與落髮產品也持續貢獻成長，同時也展現我們訂閱模式在更多疾病領域的廣泛適用性。

Overall, we believe subscriptions are becoming a more meaningful part of how consumers engage with GoodRx and are strengthening our ability to build deeper, more recurring consumer relationships over time. Combined with our Pharma Direct solutions, it also creates a strong foundation to extend our model into the employer channel.

整體而言，我們相信訂閱服務正成為消費者與 GoodRx 互動中更重要的一部分，並強化我們隨時間建立更深、更具經常性的消費者關係之能力。結合我們的 Pharma Direct 解決方案，也為我們將模式延伸至雇主通路奠定了堅實基礎。

Through GoodRx Employer Direct, self-insured employers can offer manufacturer-sponsored pricing to their employee populations and choose to directly subsidize the amount, with employer contributions layered seamlessly on top of the manufacturer's approved price. This creates a clear, reduced out-of-pocket cost for employees, while giving employers a more flexible and predictable way to support high-impact therapies.

透過 GoodRx Employer Direct，自保型雇主可向其員工族群提供由製造商贊助的定價，並可選擇直接補貼金額；雇主的補助可無縫叠加在製造商核准價格之上。這可為員工帶來明確、降低的自付費用，同時讓雇主以更具彈性且更可預測的方式支持高影響力療法。

We are already seeing this model in practice through our work with Eli Lilly and Company on Zepbound KwikPen, which enables employers to subsidize Lilly's $449 price across all doses. This is a clear example of how Pharma Direct pricing can be extended into the employer channel without requiring changes to the core benefit structure.

我們已透過與 Eli Lilly and Company 在 Zepbound KwikPen 上的合作看到此模式的實際運作，使雇主得以在所有劑量上補貼 Lilly 的 449 美元價格。這清楚示範了 Pharma Direct 定價如何在不需要改變核心福利結構的情況下，延伸至雇主通路。

We are also extending our subscription offering into this channel. Employers can offer a customized version of GoodRx for weight loss, integrating clinical care, transparent pricing on FDA-approved therapies, and broad pharmacy availability into a single, streamlined experience. This approach allows employers to address coverage gaps without redesigning their core pharmacy benefits, while delivering meaningful savings and improved access for employees.

我們也正將訂閱產品延伸至此通路。雇主可提供客製化版本的 GoodRx 減重方案，將臨床照護、FDA 核准療法的透明定價，以及廣泛的藥局可近性整合為單一、精簡的體驗。此作法讓雇主在不重新設計核心藥局福利的情況下，補足保障缺口，同時為員工帶來實質節省與更佳可近性。

I will now turn the call over to Chris to discuss Q1 results.

接下來我把電話交給 Chris，請他說明第一季的結果。

Thank you, Wendy, and good morning, everyone. For the first quarter, we delivered revenue of $194 million and adjusted EBITDA of $58.3 million, representing an adjusted EBITDA margin of 30%.

謝謝你，Wendy，各位早安。第一季我們的營收為 1.94 億美元，調整後 EBITDA 為 5,830 萬美元，調整後 EBITDA 利潤率為 30%。

Looking at revenue in more detail, prescription transactions revenue was $113.7 million, down 24% year over year, reflecting the continued lapping impacts from 2025 as well as the unit economics pressure we previously discussed. Importantly, volume trends stabilized with monthly active consumers flat sequentially at 5.3 million.

更詳細來看營收，處方交易營收為 1.137 億美元，年減 24%，反映 2025 年的持續比較基期影響，以及我們先前討論過的單位經濟壓力。重要的是，量的趨勢已趨於穩定，每月活躍消費者數連續比較持平，為 530 萬。

Pharma Direct revenue grew to $52.2 million, up 82% year over year, driven by strong momentum with manufacturer partnerships and continued expansion of our self-pay pricing, specifically with the successful launch of the Wegovy Pill. Pharma Direct delivered consistent sequential growth throughout 2025, which continued into the first quarter of 2026, supporting the year-over-year increase and reflecting the ongoing ramp of our consumer direct pricing offering.

Pharma Direct 營收成長至 5,220 萬美元，年增 82%，主要由與製造商合作夥伴關係的強勁動能，以及我們自費定價的持續擴張所帶動，尤其是 Wegovy Pill 的成功上市。Pharma Direct 在 2025 年全年持續呈現穩定的連續成長，並延續至 2026 年第一季，支撐年增表現，反映我們消費者直達定價產品的持續爬坡。

Subscription revenue increased 16% year over year to $24.4 million, supported by ongoing adoption of our condition-specific offerings. For the full-year 2026, we are raising our guidance and now expect revenue to be in the range of $765 million to $785 million and adjusted EBITDA to be at least $235 million.

訂閱營收年增 16% 至 2,440 萬美元，受惠於我們特定疾病產品的持續採用。針對 2026 年全年，我們上調指引，現在預期營收將落在 7.65 億至 7.85 億美元區間，調整後 EBITDA 至少為 2.35 億美元。

While we expect continued pressure on prescription transactions revenue in 2026, our increase in guidance is driven primarily by stronger-than-expected performance in Pharma Direct as we continue to build momentum in our consumer direct pricing offering. Consequently, we now expect Pharma Direct revenue to grow over 50% year over year. Subscription revenue is also expected to build throughout the year as our condition-specific programs continue to scale.

雖然我們預期 2026 年處方交易營收仍將承受壓力，但我們上調指引主要是因為 Pharma Direct 的表現優於預期，且我們持續在消費者直達定價產品上累積動能。因此，我們現在預期 Pharma Direct 營收將年增超過 50%。訂閱營收也預期將在全年逐步提升，因為我們的特定疾病方案持續擴張。

With that, I will turn the call back over to Wendy.

接下來，我把電話交回給 Wendy。

Thank you, Chris. Q1 was defined by execution, but more importantly, it was a quarter where we saw clear validation of the strategy we're executing and the sustainable value proposition we believe it creates. We delivered strong performance in Pharma Direct, accelerated growth in subscriptions, and stable engagement in Rx Marketplace, reflecting progress against the priorities we outlined coming into the year.

謝謝你，Chris。第一季的關鍵在於執行力，但更重要的是，這一季我們清楚看到我們正在執行的策略，以及我們相信其所創造的可持續價值主張，獲得明確驗證。我們在 Pharma Direct 交出強勁表現、訂閱加速成長，且 Rx Marketplace 的互動維持穩定，反映我們在年初所提出優先事項上的進展。

Across the business, we are making it easier for consumers to access medications and navigate the prescription journey, while creating value for manufacturers, employers, and pharmacy partners. As the market continues to evolve, we believe this positions GoodRx to play a more central role in how patients evaluate affordability and access treatment. That momentum gives us confidence in the opportunity ahead, and we remain focused on disciplined execution as we continue to scale the business and drive durable long-term growth.

在整個業務中，我們正讓消費者更容易取得藥品並順利完成處方旅程，同時為製造商、雇主與藥局合作夥伴創造價值。隨著市場持續演進，我們相信這使 GoodRx 能在病患評估可負擔性與取得治療的方式中扮演更核心的角色。這股動能讓我們對未來機會更具信心；我們也將持續專注於嚴謹執行，在擴大業務規模的同時推動長期且可持續的成長。

With that, I'll turn the call over to the operator for questions.

接下來，我把電話交給接線員進行提問。

(Operator Instructions) Michael Cherny, Leerink Partners.

(接線員指示) Leerink Partners 的 Michael Cherny。

Maybe just one quick first for Chris, so I can understand the change in guidance. It seems that Pharma Direct has gone up. I think implied subscription has gone up. What is the change in view, if any, been on the PTR revenue base that's embedded in the new guidance?

我先快速問 Chris 一個問題，讓我理解指引變動。看起來 Pharma Direct 上調了。我認為隱含的訂閱也上調了。那麼，新指引中所包含的 PTR 營收基礎，你們的看法是否有任何改變？

Thank you, Michael, for the question. First of all, prescription transaction revenue met our internal expectations. I know we didn't guide specifically to it, but I think it's -- when you look at the [MAC], sequentially, it was slightly up, rounded to flat, but slightly up quarter over quarter. And then the reflected unit economics that we talked about, I think it was largely in line.

謝謝你，Michael 的提問。首先，處方交易營收符合我們的內部預期。我知道我們沒有對此提供具體指引，但我認為——當你看 [MAC] 時，連續比較略有上升，四捨五入可視為持平，但確實是較前一季小幅上升。另外，我們談到的單位經濟反映，我認為也大致符合預期。

Relative to the full-year guidance, I think being down in this 24% range was probably in line with how we thought about it. I would say, I would think about the year-over-year full year about the same. And then, obviously, we're focused on the Pharma Direct and the building momentum in our condition-specific subscriptions offering as well.

就全年指引而言，我認為年減約 24% 的幅度大致符合我們原先的想法。我會說，我對全年年比的看法大致相同。而且，顯然我們也聚焦在 Pharma Direct，以及在我們特定疾病訂閱產品上持續累積動能。

That's helpful, Chris, and certainly great context. And so that leads me to my, I guess, follow-up. Second question is, on that subscription side, it's great to see the condition-specific growth playing out. We all know this to be a highly competitive market, both established and fly-by-night players. As you think about what's driving your improvement in the subscription base, what do you think it is that GoodRx is doing better, differently, that's allowing you to drive that improved stability?

這很有幫助，Chris，而且確實提供了很好的背景脈絡。因此這也引出了我接下來的追問。第二個問題是，在訂閱端，很高興看到特定病症的成長正在發揮作用。我們都知道這是一個競爭非常激烈的市場，既有成熟玩家，也有來去匆匆的業者。當你們思考是什麼在推動訂閱用戶基礎的改善時，你認為 GoodRx 做得更好、或做得不同的地方是什麼，讓你們能夠帶動更佳的穩定性？

Hi, Michael. Good morning. It's Wendy. I'll start, and Chris, by all means, chime in if you've got additional thoughts. Look, I think it's a combination of a couple of things. One, our brand recognition and consumer engagement has long positioned us as really the number one digital drug pricing platform. So that top of funnel connection we already have with consumers is, in fact, strong.

嗨，Michael。早安。我是 Wendy。我先回答，Chris，如果你有補充想法也請隨時加入。我想這是幾個因素的綜合。第一，我們的品牌知名度與消費者互動長期以來讓我們穩居真正的第一大數位藥品定價平台。因此，我們在漏斗頂端與消費者之間既有的連結其實相當強。

And when you tie that and point that back to conversations with pharma where they look at the connectivity we have with consumers, that absolutely drives an engagement on the brand deals that they want to strike with us, which of course then feeds into success of those subscription offerings. Yes, you've got to have exceptional service in those programs, but you've also got to have competitive pricing on the drugs that those patients are seeking in addition to potentially telemedicine.

當你把這點連結到我們與藥廠的對話——他們看到我們與消費者之間的連結能力——這確實會推動他們在品牌合作案上與我們合作的意願，而這當然也會進一步帶動那些訂閱產品的成功。是的，這些方案必須提供卓越的服務，但同時也必須在病患所尋求的藥品上提供具競爭力的價格，另外也可能包含遠距醫療。

I would also say our connectivity to a broad and unbiased retail network is a competitive advantage. We are not purposely launching these programs where you've got to use a specific home delivery provider. But I would footnote, we're happy to support home delivery or retail. At the end of the day, it's really about consumer choice.

我也會說，我們與廣泛且不偏頗的零售通路網路之連結是一項競爭優勢。我們並不是刻意推出那種必須使用特定到府配送供應商的方案。但我補充一下，我們很樂意同時支援到府配送或零售取藥。歸根結底，重點在於消費者的選擇。

And so when you think about those three elements, again, our connectivity on brand, NPS with prescribers, in addition to that vast retail network, we believe that is what gives us a competitive advantage and why we're finding success and also aligns to our reason for investing in the business when we originally outlined that thesis, I think, mid-last year. Anything you'd add, Chris?

因此，當你把這三個要素放在一起思考——我們的品牌連結、處方醫師端的 NPS，以及那個龐大的零售網路——我們相信這就是我們的競爭優勢所在，也是我們之所以能取得成功的原因；同時也與我們在最初提出那個投資本業的論點時（我想是在去年年中）所說的一致。Chris，你還有要補充的嗎？

Yeah, I would say from a financial perspective, Michael, what I'm encouraged by is we largely started to build momentum on the subscription offering without a lot of marketing dollars pushed in. If you look year over year, we're actually down a little bit from Q1 from a marketing spend perspective. So that is reflective, I think, to Wendy's point about the volume of the consumers that are visiting our platform organically, and we got a lot of tailwinds from that.

是的，從財務角度來看，Michael，讓我感到振奮的是：我們在訂閱產品上建立動能，主要並沒有投入大量行銷預算。如果你看年對年，我們的行銷支出相較 Q1 其實還略為下降。因此我認為這反映了 Wendy 所說的：有大量消費者是自然流量造訪我們的平台，而我們也因此受惠於許多順風。

We're pushing marketing dollars, and I actually expect to spend more dollars throughout the rest of the year on marketing and specifically towards our condition offerings. So I think we're encouraged by the early momentum we're building, and I think we'll continue to invest dollars there throughout the year.

我們正在投入行銷預算，而且我其實預期在今年剩餘時間會花更多行銷費用，特別是投入在我們的特定病症方案上。所以我們對目前建立的早期動能感到鼓舞，也認為今年會持續在這方面投入資金。

Great. Thanks so much. Nice job.

很好。非常感謝。做得很棒。

Jailendra Singh, Truist.

Jailendra Singh，Truist。

Hi. This is Payton Engdahl on for Jailendra. I wanted to hit on the Surescripts partnership you guys announced. It's been about like five months since that partnership has been announced. I was wondering if you could provide just an update on that and also if that had led to any type of that performance in the quarter?

嗨。我是代替 Jailendra 的 Payton Engdahl。我想談談你們宣布的 Surescripts 合作夥伴關係。那項合作宣布至今大約五個月了。我想請問你們能否提供一些最新進展，以及這是否在本季帶來任何類型的表現影響？

Yeah, I would say nothing material at this point. We remain partnered, but continuing to figure out how best to deploy that offering. Not a lot to comment on at this point, but we appreciate the question.

是的，我會說目前沒有任何重大進展。我們仍維持合作關係，但仍在持續釐清如何最好地部署該項產品/方案。目前沒有太多可評論的，但我們感謝你的提問。

Yeah, from a financial perspective, nothing material and really nothing built in the guide on that either.

是的，從財務角度來看，沒有任何重大影響，而且在財測指引中也沒有把這部分納入。

Okay. And then I'd also just want to hit really quick on the ISP. You guys noted some volume reduction in one of your ISP, Integrated Savings Program. Just any color on that that you could provide and if this was the same ISP partner that you guys saw last year as well, the same issue? So any color there would be helpful.

了解。另外我也想很快問一下 ISP。你們提到某個 ISP（Integrated Savings Program，整合式節省方案）出現一些量的下降。能否提供一些背景說明？以及這是否就是你們去年也遇到同樣問題的那個 ISP 夥伴？所以如果能補充一些細節會很有幫助。

Yeah, thanks for the question. And for clarification, there's no volume reduction in 2026. Anything we've referenced is a volume reduction associated with 2025 in the past. So we are only referencing it as a comp relative to the lapping impact and the year-over-year impact from the volume that was included in '25 is not recurring this year. But so far this year, the ISP programs are performing consistent with our expectations, and the volume looks relatively stable.

好的，謝謝你的問題。先澄清一下，2026 年並沒有量的下降。我們過去提到的任何內容，都是與 2025 年相關的量的下降。因此我們現在提到它，只是作為比較基期（comp），也就是與去年同期的遞延/消退影響（lapping impact）以及年對年影響有關：2025 年包含的那部分量，今年不會再重複出現。但截至目前，今年 ISP 方案的表現符合我們的預期，量看起來也相對穩定。

John Ransom, Raymond James.

John Ransom，Raymond James。

Just a couple for me. This is a little tangential to what you do, but some other players who focus on manufacturers, particularly on the software side, have noticed a pause in their marketing spend, Novo being called out specifically. What behavior -- I mean, obviously, your numbers didn't show any of that, but would you call out any changes in behavior as you're having dialogue with these folks in terms of how they're thinking about marketing spend and go-to-market that either is a good guy or bad guy?

我有兩個問題。這跟你們做的事情有點間接，但一些同樣聚焦製造商、特別是軟體端的其他業者，注意到他們的行銷支出出現暫停，尤其點名 Novo。你們在與這些客戶對話時，觀察到他們在行銷預算與上市策略（go-to-market）方面有任何行為改變嗎？我的意思是，你們的數字顯然沒有顯示這種情況，但你們會不會指出任何變化——不論是正面或負面？

Good morning, John. Good to hear from you. No, we're actually not seeing any impact, I would say, quite the opposite. I mean, having recently returned from a Assembia, not that we're not engaged continually with these same partners, but obviously that's a forum where you get to see everybody in the span of about 48 hours.

早安，John。很高興聽到你的聲音。沒有，我們其實沒有看到任何影響；我會說甚至恰恰相反。我的意思是，我最近剛從 Assembia 回來——並不是說我們平時沒有持續與同樣的合作夥伴互動——但那確實是一個能在大約 48 小時內見到所有人的場合。

Feedback continues to be leaning in even more so, I would say, I think largely as a result of the success we've had to date. I mean, we've -- Laura, I believe, joined us for our last call where she indicated that we're seeing success even earlier in the year that we had previously that a lot of that revenue was pulled forward that we typically book.

回饋持續顯示他們更積極投入，我會這麼說；我想很大程度上是因為我們迄今取得的成功。我的意思是——Laura 我記得在我們上一通電話會議也有加入，她提到我們在今年更早的時間就看到成功，且我們通常會認列的部分收入有不少被提前實現。

So far, we are demonstrating exceptional ROI for the dollars that pharma is investing with us. And I'll give the regulatory environment a little bit of credit here, too, to suggest that the push on affordability and direct-to-patient programs coming out of various sources is continuing to help fuel pharma's motivation to do deals and/or expand with us.

到目前為止，我們正為藥廠投在我們身上的資金展現出非常出色的投資報酬率（ROI）。我也會把部分功勞歸於監管環境：各方對可負擔性以及直接面向病患（direct-to-patient）方案的推動，持續在助長藥廠做交易以及/或與我們擴大合作的動機。

John, I would say the -- first of all, the one thing to note is our point-of-sale buydown programs are not a part of those marketing budgets. So that's not impacted in terms of what you may be seeing in the marketplace. And the only dynamic I think that we really noted is -- I think Laura, who joined us last quarter, who's the President of our Pharma Direct businesses, noted that the number of deals were down a little bit, but the dollar amount of those deals were higher. So net-net, we're up across the board across Pharma Direct. So we're seeing positive contribution from all aspects of that line of business.

John，我會說——首先要注意的一點是，我們的銷售點降價補貼（point-of-sale buydown）方案不屬於那些行銷預算的一部分。因此就你在市場上可能看到的情況而言，這部分不會受到影響。而我們真正提到的唯一動態是——我想上季加入我們的 Laura（她是我們 Pharma Direct 業務的總裁）提到，交易案的數量略有下降，但每筆交易的金額更高。因此整體而言（net-net），我們在 Pharma Direct 各方面都是成長的。所以我們看到這條業務線的各個面向都帶來正向貢獻。

Great. And then just going back to the old core business, Rx Marketplace, I know it's been a slog, but are you implying at least stabilization in terms of transactions and monthly MAC and transactions subscriptions? Do we look for that to stabilize and flatten, or is there continued longer-term pressure there?

很好。再回到舊的核心業務 Rx Marketplace，我知道這一路走來很辛苦，但你們是否在暗示至少在交易量與每月 MAC，以及交易訂閱方面出現穩定？我們是否可以期待它趨於穩定並持平，還是長期仍會持續承壓？

Yeah, I think it's a great question, John, and I appreciate it. So I do believe that our MAC will -- I would call it flatten. If you look back to last year, certainly with the impacts from the Rite Aid store closures and the ISP programs, other things we noted, we saw sequential declines. As I noted in my prepared remarks, we're actually slightly up. It rounds to flat quarter over quarter.

是的，John，我覺得這是個很好的問題，也謝謝你。所以我確實相信我們的 MAC 會——我會稱之為趨於平坦。如果你回頭看去年，當然受到 Rite Aid 門市關閉以及 ISP 計畫等我們提到的其他因素影響，我們看到連續性的下滑。如同我在事先準備的發言中提到的，我們其實是略有上升。四捨五入後，季度對季度基本持平。

We've modeled in some continued erosion in MAC, but much more flatlined relative to last year's trajectory. So I do expect that to stay a little bit under pressure. But look, the start to the year was strong. It built some momentum, but I think we're taking a very conservative approach for the rest of the year.

我們的模型仍納入了 MAC 持續一些侵蝕，但相較於去年的走勢要平坦得多。所以我確實預期它仍會承受一些壓力。不過你看，今年開局很強。它累積了一些動能，但我認為我們對今年剩餘時間採取非常保守的做法。

I mean, if we look at like CVS, for example, and clearly they're on offense taking share. Don't know what's going on with Walgreen anymore -- sorry, my dog is going crazy. But is that -- if the retail marketplace continues to concentrate to the winners, is that neutral, flat, good for GoodRx? Or is it not?

我的意思是，如果我們看像 CVS 這樣的例子，很明顯他們正積極搶市占。也不知道 Walgreen 現在到底怎麼了——抱歉，我的狗在發瘋。但如果零售市場持續向贏家集中，這對 GoodRx 是中性、持平、還是有利？還是其實不利？

So John, just for clarification -- John, do you -- for clarification, do you mean primarily just cash customers that CVS is attracting? I want to understand what you mean by the CVS common or other retailers because, of course, we work with all of them.

所以 John，先澄清一下——John，你的意思是——為了澄清，你主要是指 CVS 吸引到的現金自付客戶嗎？我想理解你提到 CVS 或其他零售商的脈絡，因為當然，我們和他們全部都有合作。

Yeah, but what I mean is that the stronger players in retail pharmacy are taking share from the weaker players and so is that neutral, positive to GoodRx or not? I mean, I know the loss of Rite Aid was a bad guy, but let's assume the retail marketplace stabilizes and the strong gets stronger. How do you view that in terms of your position in the market?

對，但我的意思是，零售藥局裡較強的玩家正在從較弱的玩家那裡拿走市占，所以這對 GoodRx 是中性還是正面？我的意思是，我知道失去 Rite Aid 是個壞消息，但假設零售市場穩定下來、強者更強。你如何看待這件事對你們市場地位的影響？

Yeah, I mean, look, in general, I would say we work with all of the top players. I mean, full disclosure, of course, we do have slightly different economics depending upon who the retail player is, but all things in the aggregate. All of our retailer partners are quite happy with the profitability they're experiencing in partnership with us.

是的，我的意思是，整體來說，我會說我們與所有主要玩家都有合作。坦白說，當然，依不同零售商，我們的經濟條件會略有差異，但把所有因素加總來看。我們所有零售合作夥伴都對與我們合作所獲得的獲利能力相當滿意。

Again, you heard us talk through historically how we are prioritizing margin accretion to retailers with the direct deals that we've been striking. So having said that, we on the whole in the aggregate are somewhat indifferent to where our consumers choose to go. Again, not to disregard the fact that, of course, we do have slightly different economics, but not materially so.

同樣地，你也聽到我們過去談到，我們如何透過所簽訂的直接合作協議，優先讓零售商的毛利提升。因此，整體而言、在總體加總的層面，我們對消費者選擇去哪一家其實有些無所謂。再次強調，並不是忽略我們確實有些微不同的經濟條件，但差異並不重大。

Rite Aid was the outlier at the time, which, of course, was why the impact was, I think, so significant last year. But beyond that, we're focused on striking fair deals with each such that we're not in that situation again, whereby any type of shift of our consumer set to a different retailer, should things end up not going well with a retailer, shouldn't provide such an outsized impact to us again.

Rite Aid 當時是個例外，當然這也是為什麼我認為去年影響會那麼顯著。但除此之外，我們專注於與每一家談出公平的合作條件，避免再出現那種情況：也就是如果我們的消費者群轉向其他零售商——假如某家零售商最後經營不順——不應該再對我們造成如此不成比例的影響。

Charles Rhyee, TD Cowen.

Charles Rhyee，TD Cowen。

Chris, maybe I can ask this question for you. So obviously, we have the manufacturing direct bucket, which is doing very well. We have the older PTR and obviously it's good to see that MAC are flattening out. Subscriptions are growing. If we think about all those buckets together and maybe you think about -- what was total prescriptions processed by GoodRx in the quarter and what was that growth year-over-year?

Chris，也許我可以問你這個問題。很明顯，我們有製藥商直連（manufacturing direct）這一塊，表現非常好。我們也有較舊的 PTR，而看到 MAC 趨於平坦當然是好事。訂閱也在成長。如果把這些板塊放在一起看，或許你可以談談——本季 GoodRx 總共處理了多少張處方？年對年成長是多少？

And is it maybe better for us -- because I know we've all been very focused on MACs and PTR. But as the model shifts, is it better to look at what is our total prescriptions that we are touching and processing? And maybe if you can give us a sense for what that looks like and that growth has been, that'd be helpful. Thanks.

以及，這樣看是否對我們更好——因為我知道我們一直非常關注 MAC 和 PTR。但隨著模型轉變，是否更應該看我們觸及並處理的處方總量？如果你能讓我們了解一下大概的樣貌以及成長情況，會很有幫助。謝謝。

Yeah. Thanks, Charles. Appreciate the question. I think it's a fair question to ask about additional metrics that we might point to. We haven't disclosed the consolidated prescription transactions across the entire business. So let us take that away and think through it a bit.

好的。謝謝你，Charles。感謝這個問題。我認為你提出我們可能可以引用的其他指標，是個合理的問題。我們尚未揭露整個業務合併後的處方交易總量。所以我們先把這點帶回去，再仔細想一想。

But I think part of your underlying point to the question is there is -- if our business model works correctly, there is some cannibalization out of our core business into Pharma Direct. And if you think about GLP-1s as a great example that last year, prior to the pharma-sponsored point-of-sale programs, retailers and consumers were paying full price and that was clearly coming through our PTR line and it had higher PTR per MAC, et cetera.

但我想你這個問題背後的一部分重點是——如果我們的商業模式運作正確，確實會有一部分從核心業務被「蠶食」到 Pharma Direct。以 GLP-1 為很好的例子：去年在藥廠贊助的銷售點（point-of-sale）計畫推出之前，零售商和消費者是付全額價格，而那很明顯會反映在我們的 PTR 線上，且每個 MAC 的 PTR 更高等等。

If those same consumers are getting that same prescription through now a point-of-sale buy-down program, it shows up on the Pharma Direct line. So there is interplay in terms of one side of our business cannibalizing the other, and that's actually preferred to us. It's a much more longer-term durable revenue stream for us. But I think the point of your question is a takeaway for us, and let us think through that.

如果同樣的消費者現在透過銷售點的降價補貼（buy-down）計畫取得同一張處方，它就會出現在 Pharma Direct 這條線上。所以在我們的業務之間，確實存在一邊蠶食另一邊的互動，而這其實是我們偏好的結果。對我們而言，這是更長期、更具韌性的營收來源。但我認為你問題的重點值得我們帶回去思考，我們會再仔細研究。

And that'd be great in the future. But do you have a sense right now whether if you looked at all the prescriptions that you touched, regardless of what bucket it was in, would you say that we're seeing growth? Is it up slightly, flat? Just curious if you could commentary there.

那未來如果能提供就太好了。但你現在是否有概念：如果把你們觸及的所有處方都算進來，不管屬於哪個板塊，你會說我們正在成長嗎？是小幅上升、持平？只是好奇你能否就此做些評論。

And then maybe one other would be -- a lot of the companies have called out weather impacting first quarter, obviously, with a lot of the storms earlier in the -- was it January, February? Just curious if that had any impact in the quarter and if you could size that for us? Thanks.

另外還有一個問題是——很多公司都提到天氣對第一季的影響，顯然年初有很多風暴——是 1 月、2 月嗎？好奇這對本季是否有任何影響？你能否幫我們量化一下？謝謝。

Yeah, let me take your first one first. In terms of your first question, if you imply -- with our MAC count, which is largely driven by the prescription transactions revenue, that was flat, right? And Pharma Direct is growing. So I think the implied impact is our prescriptions -- total prescription service on a consolidated basis is up overall, right?

好的，我先回答你第一個。就第一個問題而言，如果你是從我們的 MAC 數量來推論——而 MAC 很大程度是由處方交易營收所驅動——那是持平，對吧？而 Pharma Direct 在成長。所以隱含的結論是：我們合併口徑下的處方服務總量整體是上升的，對吧？

In terms of weather impacts, I don't think we felt it. I mean, the flu season was a little bit longer and later than we thought. We didn't see really any impact.

至於天氣影響，我不覺得我們有感受到。我的意思是，流感季比我們想的更長、也更晚。我們真的沒有看到什麼影響。

I can take that question. I mean, I will say, look, we track volume by geography just like a large retailer does. And true to form, you're not wrong. Whenever there's a random storm, yes, on the whole, volumes dip, but you almost always see those recover in the following week.

我可以回答這個問題。我的意思是，我會說，你看，我們像大型零售商一樣按地理區域追蹤量能。而且確實如此，你說得沒錯。只要有突發的風暴，整體而言量能會下滑，但幾乎總是會在接下來的一週回補。

So it follows a similar cycle to pharmacies, if you will, in that regard, because that, of course, is where our consumers, in fact, get bills. But usually, if a consumer is motivated to get a prescription, they'll just then push it into the following week if they were unable to do it based upon whatever natural event took place.

所以在這方面，它的循環和藥局很類似，因為當然，我們的消費者實際上就是在那裡領藥。但通常如果消費者有動機要拿處方，若因任何自然事件而無法當週完成，他們就會把需求延後到下一週。

Steven Valiquette, Mizuho Securities.

Steven Valiquette，瑞穗證券。

I guess for me, I just have a couple of quick confirmatory questions around the accounting and revenue recognition on the subscription side. So just mathematically, the revenue per subscription, it's moving up from, call it, roughly $10 to $11.

我這邊大概只有幾個關於訂閱端會計處理與收入認列的快速確認問題。就純粹從數學上看，每個訂閱的收入大概是從約10美元上升到11美元。

And I'm wondering around the GLP-1s, are you just booking the $39 per month for the unlimited online care in the subscription revenue? Just want to confirm that first, and that's why -- maybe that's why that's moving up. I just want to get more color on that first.

我想問的是，關於GLP-1，你們是否只是把每月39美元的「不限次線上照護」記在訂閱收入裡？想先確認這一點，這也許就是它上升的原因。我想先就這點多了解一些。

Yeah, that is correct, Steven.

對，Steven，沒錯。

Okay, and then as far as some of the other companies around booking the drug revenue, some of your peers are booking the compounded drug revenue on their P&L, but not the branded drug revenue. So I don't know if there's any clarification on that on your P&L one way or the other, and where that's showing up, if at all. But I just wanted to get just quick confirmation on that as well. Thanks.

好的，那再來關於其他公司在藥品收入入帳的方式，你們一些同業會把配製藥（compounded drug）的收入記在損益表上，但不會把品牌藥的收入記上去。所以我不確定你們的損益表在這方面是否有任何一種方式的釐清，以及那部分（如果有的話）是呈現在哪裡。我也想就這點做個快速確認。謝謝。

Yeah. It's helpful. Thank you. So as I said, the $39 you referenced, which is the monthly subscription fee, is hitting the subscription line to the extent it's going through our point of sale, that buy down programs. You're seeing that portion of the revenue actually getting picked up in Pharma Direct.

好的。這很有幫助。謝謝。所以如我所說，你提到的39美元，也就是每月訂閱費，是記在訂閱那一行；但在它透過我們的銷售點（point of sale）流程、也就是降價補貼（buy down）方案時，你會看到那一部分的收入其實會被歸入Pharma Direct。

It does not get grossed up treatment the way you're suggesting others do it, especially like the compounders. We don't do any compounding. We only deal with the FDA approved, the drugs that are branded drugs on Pharma Direct side. So we don't have any gross up of the drugs included in our revenue.

我們不會像你所說的那樣做「總額法（gross-up）」處理，尤其是像配製藥業者那樣。我們不做任何配製。我們只處理FDA核准的藥品，也就是Pharma Direct端的品牌藥。因此，我們的收入中不會包含任何藥品的總額法入帳。

Brian Tanquilut, Jefferies.

Brian Tanquilut，Jefferies。

So maybe just to follow-up on some of these discussions. When we think about the pull forward and Pharma Direct that you spoke about earlier, should we still expect sequential growth going forward this year in that? And then if you can just give some more color on the growth in that space, like we think about or talk about the shift of claims and high-cost branded from core to Pharma Direct segments, like how much of this is actually affecting either line item?

那我可能就延續前面一些討論追問一下。當我們思考你先前提到的提前拉動（pull forward）以及Pharma Direct時，今年接下來我們是否仍應預期它會逐季成長？另外，如果你能再多補充一些該領域的成長動能：例如我們在談理賠與高成本品牌藥從核心（core）轉到Pharma Direct分部，這當中有多少其實會影響到任一個營收項目？

Yeah, thanks, Brian. Appreciate the question. The answer is yes. If you look at our guide to 50%-plus growth and the $52 million we put in Q1, I think you would imply continued sequential growth throughout the rest of 2026 for Pharma Direct, and we have pretty strong conviction at 50%-plus growth on Pharma Direct for the remainder of the year.

好的，謝謝，Brian。感謝你的問題。答案是會。如果你看我們指引的50%以上成長，以及我們在第一季做到的5,200萬美元，我認為你可以推論在2026年剩餘期間，Pharma Direct會持續逐季成長；而且我們對今年剩餘時間Pharma Direct維持50%以上成長有相當強的信心。

Yeah, I will -- this is Wendy. I'll take the second half of your question. So as we think about just longer-term outlook and what does the runway look like for Pharma Direct, look, in our ongoing conversations and partnerships with these same manufacturers, they truly are starting to view us as the best channel solution for engagements with patients.

我來回答你問題的後半段——我是Wendy。我會接著談第二部分。就長期展望而言，當我們思考Pharma Direct的跑道有多長時，坦白說，在我們與這些相同製造商持續的對話與合作中，他們確實開始把我們視為與病患互動的最佳通路解決方案。

So that continues to bolster our confidence in the pipeline of opportunity, not just this year, but well into the out years. I mean, added to the wraparound regulatory environment, which would suggest there will be more motivation for manufacturers to strike direct-to-patient deals.

因此，這持續強化我們對機會管線的信心，不僅是今年，還包括未來好幾年。再加上周邊的監管環境，這也意味著製造商會更有動機去達成直接面向病患（direct-to-patient）的合作。

No doubt GLP-1s have been a significant component of the growth we've experienced this year. But to be clear, there are a number of other GLP-1 molecules that we'll be launching. And outside of GLP-1s, we've continued to see material growth in our Pharma Direct business. So that continues to give us confidence that we're going to continue to see this line item grow, hence our commentary on that being one of our key strategic growth drivers for the business.

毫無疑問，GLP-1是我們今年成長的重要組成。但要說清楚的是，我們還會推出多個其他GLP-1分子。而且在GLP-1之外，我們的Pharma Direct業務也持續看到顯著成長。因此，這也讓我們有信心這個營收項目會持續成長，這也是我們所說它是公司關鍵策略性成長動能之一的原因。

Allen Lutz, Bank of America.

Allen Lutz，美國銀行。

Wendy, at the top of the call, you talked about a third of all Wegovy Pill transactions in the first two months coming through GoodRx. I mean, congratulations on that. That's really, really strong. Can you talk about the trajectory from launch to maybe the March exit rate? Or anything you're seeing early in April? How should we think about the contributions from that over the course of the quarter and then how are you thinking about contributions from that through the remainder of the year?

Wendy，在電話會議一開始你提到，Wegovy Pill在前兩個月的所有交易中，有三分之一是透過GoodRx完成的。我的意思是，恭喜你們。這真的非常、非常強勁。你能談談從上市到可能3月的期末（exit）速度的走勢嗎？或是你們在4月初看到的任何情況？我們該如何看待它在本季的貢獻，以及你們如何看待它在今年剩餘時間的貢獻？

Sure. Well, I'll start maybe more philosophically just saying that this is just an exceptional example of what a brand launch with a cash strategy or point-of-sale buydown can do in the market. And we had been partnered very closely with Novo on the timing, the PR tied to it, the marketing elements.

當然。我先從比較理念層面說起：這是一個非常出色的例子，說明品牌上市若搭配現金策略或銷售點降價補貼（point-of-sale buydown），在市場上能帶來什麼效果。我們與Novo在時程、相關公關（PR）以及行銷要素上都非常緊密合作。

They, of course, owned their portion of what needed to happen, including embedding in EHR, such that prescribers could see the doses of the pill to readily be able to write for it. They had gotten well ahead of ensuring that supply was available so that pharmacies could, in fact, dispense the same medication.

當然，他們也負責他們那一部分需要完成的事項，包括嵌入EHR，讓開立處方者能看到藥丸的劑量，從而更容易開立處方。他們也提前確保供應充足，讓藥局確實能配發相同的藥品。

And so all of those things tied together pointed to just an incredibly strong performance out of the gate. I will also say, I think there's something to be said for utilizing the same brand name that was used in their auto-injector. So there was consumer familiarity with just the brand name, which we can discount that if you want, but we do think it made a meaningful difference in how that program has continued to perform.

因此，所有這些因素結合在一起，使得它一上市就有極其強勁的表現。我也想補充一點：沿用他們自動注射器（auto-injector）所使用的同一個品牌名稱，確實有其意義。因此消費者對品牌名稱已有熟悉度；你可以選擇不把這點看得那麼重要，但我們確實認為這對該方案後續表現帶來了實質差異。

As we look in the future and how we're anticipating performance of that drug, look, we don't see demand abating for GLP-1 therapies. And so for that reason, we continue to be pretty bullish on its performance, of course, even amidst other molecules launching, which, of course, will provide more consumer choice.

展望未來、以及我們如何預期該藥物的表現，坦白說，我們不認為市場對GLP-1療法的需求會減弱。因此，即便會有其他分子陸續上市、也會提供更多消費者選擇，我們仍對其表現相當樂觀。

And I think if the economics continue to hold the way most brands continue to launch and then you end up with multi-source brands, maybe pricing will come down further in the back half of the year. I mean, these prices for all of these programs continue to fluctuate, and we're keeping our finger on all of it such that we will be positioned to win, both through the weight loss subscription program or for consumers who simply want to get their fill without utilizing the weight loss program.

而且我認為，如果經濟性（economics）能像多數品牌的上市路徑那樣維持，之後進入多來源（multi-source）品牌階段，或許今年下半年價格還會再下降。我的意思是，這些方案的價格一直在波動，我們也持續密切掌握，確保我們能處於有利位置取得勝利——不論是透過減重訂閱方案，或是針對不想使用減重方案、只想直接取得藥品的消費者。

Very helpful. And then one for Chris. As we think about the composition of revenue at GoodRx, a little bit less emphasis on PTR, a little bit more emphasis on subscribers and the Pharma Direct business. I guess, Chris, conceptually, as we think about where you're advertising and where you're spending marketing dollars, 2025 versus 2026, is there anything that's materially changing in terms of where those dollars are going? And we'd love to get a sense of, if there is, some of the early insights you've had there? Thank you.

非常有幫助。接著問Chris一題。當我們思考GoodRx的營收組成時，PTR的比重稍微降低，訂閱與Pharma Direct業務的比重稍微提高。Chris，我想從概念上問：當我們看你們投放廣告與行銷費用的去向，2025年相較於2026年，在資金投向上是否有任何實質改變？如果有的話，也希望了解你們目前看到的一些初步洞察。謝謝。

Yeah. Thanks, Allen. Appreciate the question. We have pivoted our marketing budgets to be more directed at our condition-specific subscription offering. We believe that there continues to be a brand halo effect from that specific advertising. So in the past, where our marketing dollars were more generally brand -- brand generally, we are targeting the subscription offering much more heavily in 2026 comparatively.

好的。謝謝，Allen。感謝你的問題。我們已將行銷預算轉向，更聚焦於我們針對特定疾病（condition-specific）的訂閱產品。我們相信，這類特定廣告仍會帶來品牌光環效應（brand halo effect）。因此，過去我們的行銷費用較偏向一般性的品牌投放；相較之下，2026年我們會更大幅度地把重點放在訂閱產品的推廣上。

Craig Hettenbach, Morgan Stanley.

Craig Hettenbach，摩根士丹利。

Hi. This is Jay on for Craig Hettenbach. I just wanted to follow-up on the comment that PTR in the down 24% range. I know it's early, but just wondering if you can share any thoughts on the trends beyond 2026? When you say like the lower unit economics in exchange for durability, is there like an expected timeline for when that process would bottom out?

嗨。我是代替 Craig Hettenbach 的 Jay。我只是想跟進一下關於 PTR 下滑約 24% 的評論。我知道現在還早，但想請問你是否能分享一下 2026 年之後的趨勢看法？當你說以較低的單位經濟性來換取耐久性時，這個過程預期何時會觸底，有沒有大概的時間表？

Yeah. Thanks. Appreciate the question. In terms of down 24%, I do think Q1 is probably in the range of how we think about the year-over-year comp for 2026 relative to 2025. I think that when you think about macroeconomic trends, something we're watching closely with MAC being up sequentially, it's just we've got early information but, obviously, we're dealing with one quarter, and we're thinking about how to think about that for the rest of the year.

是的。謝謝。感謝你的提問。就下滑 24% 而言，我確實認為第一季大概就是我們看待 2026 年相較 2025 年年對年比較的區間。我認為當你考量總體經濟趨勢時，我們正密切關注 MAC 的季對季上升；只是我們目前掌握的是初步資訊，顯然我們只是在看一個季度，並在思考要如何把這點延伸到今年剩餘期間的判斷。

We know there's a change in the way or change in the macroeconomic environment relative to 2025. You've got more people uninsured this year. You've got some under insureds. You've got Medicaid eligibility changes. You've got the subsidies for the ACCA lives. So there's a lot of factors that we're watching pretty closely to try to understand what's going to happen to the business over 2026 and beyond.

我們知道相較於 2025 年，總體經濟環境的運作方式或環境本身出現了變化。今年有更多人沒有保險。也有一些保險不足的人。還有 Medicaid 資格變更。以及針對 ACCA 參保人群的補貼。因此我們正非常密切地觀察許多因素，試圖理解 2026 年及之後業務會如何發展。

But I think relative to like beyond 2026, we don't really have a lot of guidance for longer-term, but I think the business largely can flatten out throughout this year. We'll watch our MACs pretty closely, and as we get to the back half, we can start to provide some more color around how we think about 2027.

但我認為就 2026 年之後而言，我們其實沒有太多更長期的指引；不過我認為今年整體業務大致可以趨於平穩。我們會非常密切地觀察 MAC，並且當進入下半年時，我們可以開始提供更多我們對 2027 年看法的細節。

Luismario Higuera, Citi.

Luismario Higuera，花旗。

Hey. This is Luis on for Daniel. I know you described the TrumpRx platform as incremental to volume on a net basis, but can you give any details on what the economics of the partnership actually look like? And would it represent a meaningful revenue opportunity or is it more about strategic positioning? Thanks.

嗨。我是代替 Daniel 的 Luis。我知道你把 TrumpRx 平台描述為在淨額基礎上對量是增量，但你能否提供一些關於這項合作夥伴關係的經濟模式實際長什麼樣的細節？它會代表一個有意義的營收機會，還是更多是關於策略定位？謝謝。

Yeah. Hi. Thanks for the question. This is Wendy. Look, we have been overt in commenting that most of the volume we're seeing come through, to be clear, is largely GLP-1 coming out of TrumpRx. And there are, of course, a number of other drugs that we support on that same platform. But for now, our analysis, which would suggest, in fact, most of that volume is, in fact, incremental. There are new consumers to our platform that have previously not claimed with us.

好的。嗨。謝謝你的提問。我是 Wendy。你看，我們已經明確評論過：為了釐清，我們目前看到透過該平台進來的量，主要是來自 TrumpRx 的 GLP-1。當然，在同一個平台上我們也支援其他多種藥品。但就目前而言，我們的分析顯示，事實上其中大部分量確實是增量。有新的消費者進入我們的平台，他們過去並未透過我們進行申領。

From an economic perspective, just as a reiteration, I think we may have talked about this previously, these are actually our direct deals with pharma. So we do not have a contractual relationship with TrumpRx, nor does anyone else. It's just reflective of our pricing.

從經濟角度來看，再重申一次，我想我們之前可能談過：這些其實是我們與藥廠的直接合作。因此我們與 TrumpRx 並沒有合約關係，其他任何人也沒有。這只是反映了我們的定價。

And then in turn, when a consumer goes to choose said pricing, they're utilizing our same flow pricing economic that we have directly with the manufacturer. So there is no distinction in the economic model to us. It is our brand point-of-sale deal; no different than if someone had come to us, distinct and separate from TrumpRx, if that's helpful.

接著，當消費者選擇該定價時，他們使用的是我們與製造商直接合作所採用的同一套流程定價經濟模式。所以對我們而言，經濟模型沒有任何差異。這是我們品牌的銷售點（POS）合作；如果有人不是透過 TrumpRx 而是直接來找我們，本質上也沒有不同——希望這樣說明有幫助。

[Maxi Yang], Deutsche Bank.

[Maxi Yang]，德意志銀行。

Yeah. Hi. This is [Max Yang] for George Hill. Thanks for taking the question. The GLP-1 space has become increasingly competitive with manufacturers, telehealth platforms, and pharmacies all building direct-to-consumer capabilities. Could you talk about how do you differentiate your GLP-1 offerings from others?

是的。嗨。我是代替 George Hill 的 [Max Yang]。謝謝讓我提問。GLP-1 領域的競爭日益激烈，製造商、遠距醫療平台與藥局都在建立直達消費者（DTC）的能力。你能談談你們如何讓 GLP-1 產品與其他人做出差異化嗎？

Sure. And I'm happy to take that question and thank you for it. I think similar to the question that may have been phrased a little differently earlier in the call, largely has to do with where we sit in the ecosystem. So one, we have the benefit of really being the top brand recognition for consumers when it comes to looking for drug pricing, whether it's through web or app, so effectively our digital assets.

當然。我很樂意回答這個問題，也謝謝你的提問。我認為這與稍早在電話會議中、可能只是換個方式表述的問題類似，主要在於我們在生態系中的位置。第一，我們的優勢在於：當消費者尋找藥品價格時，不論透過網站或 App，也就是我們的數位資產，我們確實擁有最高的品牌辨識度。

We also have incredibly high NPS and brand recognition with prescribers. So they routinely, in their workflow, in their conversations with patients, not only do they check GoodRx for themselves. We have a product whereby there's their own provider portal where it will present pricing to them in their unique environment, in addition to just how consumers engage with the platform.

我們在開立處方者（醫師等）之間也擁有非常高的 NPS 與品牌辨識度。因此他們在日常工作流程中、與病患的對話中，不僅會自己查 GoodRx。我們也有一項產品：提供他們自己的醫療提供者入口網站，在其專屬環境中呈現價格資訊，此外也涵蓋消費者與平台互動的方式。

Then, of course, you've got our connectivity to a really broad retail network. We do work with most retail pharmacies in the US and some home delivery providers. And when you stack up all of those things and think about consumers engaging with us routinely already for checking their basket of drugs, in combination with being able to choose where then they get fulfillment and/or if they want to utilize our subscription offering, to your point, that really is a key differentiator compared to these other programs who aren't tapping into a broad retail network.

再來，當然還有我們與非常廣泛的零售網路的連結。我們與美國大多數零售藥局合作，也與部分到府配送服務商合作。當你把這些因素疊加起來，並考量消費者本來就經常透過我們查看其用藥組合的價格，再加上他們可以選擇在哪裡取藥／完成履約，或如你所說選擇使用我們的訂閱方案，這相較於其他未能連結廣泛零售網路的方案，確實是關鍵的差異化。

Sorry, did you have a follow-up there? Hopefully that answers your question. It sounds like maybe you had a follow-up there, but we couldn't hear it if you did.

抱歉，你那邊有要追問嗎？希望這回答了你的問題。聽起來你可能有追問，但如果你有的話我們沒有聽到。

Okay. Hearing none -- no response. This does conclude the question-and-answer session. I'd like to thank you for your participation in today's conference. This does conclude the program, and you may now disconnect.

好的。沒有聽到——沒有回應。問答環節到此結束。感謝各位參與今天的電話會議。本次會議到此結束，您現在可以掛線。

Thank you.

謝謝。