Fundraising net proceeds go to COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund for WHO

Biden and Healthcare: Why Managed Care Companies and Generic Drug Companies Will Be Healthcare Investors’ Big Winners of 2021

As Joe Biden is now officially the President of the United States, healthcare is one of the top priorities the new administration will change. The major focus will be to create a public healthcare system similar yet better to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Below, we’ll discuss some of the specific ways that Joe Biden’s new healthcare policy may affect investors’ decisions for 2021.

Managed Care Companies

Managed care companies are health organizations that contract with insurers or self-insured employers to finance and deliver health care using a specific provider network and their services and products. 1 Managed care companies were not negatively affected when the ACA was first enacted in 2010.  The current outlook on how the revised ACA under President Joe Biden affects managed care companies will be mentioned and how it relates to investors’ future actions.

Expand Coverage Through Medicare and ACA

President Biden’s healthcare policy, colloquially known as Biden Care, will have a significant adverse effect on healthcare providers. In a 2017 study, it was found that “despite increases in provider capacity, there [were] still areas of unmet need and persistent professional workforce shortages that were exacerbated by the ACA’s coverage expansions.” 8 Most unmet needs were in the mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services.” 8 With the pandemic in full swing, mental health services are needed now more than ever before. Right now, the question is if an already underprepared system will be able to cope with the increase in the volume of new people qualifying for its services? President Joe Biden and investors believe the system will. President Biden has vowed to protect the ACA and expand coverage to low-income Americans. He emphasized that he “will ensure …individuals get covered by offering premium-free access to the public option for those 4.9 million individuals who would be eligible for Medicaid but for their state’s inaction and making sure their public option covers the full scope of Medicaid benefits.” 2  The states’ inaction that President Joe Biden is referring to are 14 states in which governors and state legislatures, “have refused to take up the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid eligibility, denying access to Medicaid for an estimated 4.9 million adults.” 2

Managed care providers who are willing to cooperate with Biden Care are more likely to see investors’ support. In fact, “shares of Centene Corporation (CNC) are up 6.5% since the market closed on January 5, while shares of Molina Healthcare (MOH) are up 3.6%. The S&P 500 Managed Care Sector index is up 1.7%, slightly trailing the broader S&P 500, which is up 1.8% over the same period.” 3  This rate of change emphasizes investors’ belief in how well Biden’s health care policy will do not only in regards to the general public but with the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Generic Drug Companies

Repeal Existing Laws That Protect Brand-Name Pharmaceutical Companies

President Biden will begin to limit the power of brand-name pharmaceutical companies during his term as President.  This, once again, comes down to Biden’s health care policy and the abuse of power that pharmaceutical companies have at controlling drug prices.2 One of the policies that will have a significant effect on pharmaceutical companies and, in turn, investors is Biden’s proposed appeal of an existing law that barres Medicare from negotiating lower prices with drug corporations.2 With the repeal of this law, pharmaceutical companies will be forced to negotiate with Medicare for lowering drug prices. As a result, it is quite possible that the profit of pharmaceutic companies that create brand-name drugs will be significantly curtailed due to their loss of drug pricing control.

The Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples (CREATES) Act of 2019

In 2019, Senator Patrick Leahy (D, VT) led the formation of the Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples (“Creates”) Act of 2019. With President Joe Biden’s support, generic pharmaceutical companies a second initiative increasing the chances of their success. The proposal hopes to stop pharmaceutical companies’ anti-competitive practices in two ways. First, generic pharmaceutical companies are allowed to purchase samples of a reference listed drug (RLD). “A Reference Listed Drug (RLD) is an approved drug product to which new generic versions are compared to show that they are bioequivalent.” 9 Second, reduced approval difficulty with the Federal Drug Administration (FDA).5 The first part of the proposal would “[permit] a biosimilar or generic manufacturer to bring an action in federal court for injunctive relief (i.e., to obtain the sample it needs) and limited damages may be awarded as a deterrent in certain particularly egregious cases.” 5 This information is necessary to develop more affordable alternatives and prove that the medicine is equivalent to the brand-name product, a prerequisite for FDA approval. The second part of the legislation would “give the FDA more discretion to approve alternative safety protocols, rather than require the two parties to develop shared safety protocols.” 5 Thus, brand-name pharmaceutical companies would not interfere with generic pharmaceutical companies taking part in required protocols.

With this particular proposal approved, pharmaceutical companies would have their power in price regulation significantly reduced.

The ability of generic pharmaceutical companies to have a quick turnover time in producing generic versions of popular and much-needed medications would result in them potentially having significantly high profit margins than previous years. The company value would be anticipated to rise in direct correlation with their increased freedom to manufacture generic versions of medications. Therefore, from an investor viewpoint, generic pharmaceutical companies will have increased prominence and, hence, increased commercial attractiveness.

Limiting Launch Prices for Drugs That Face No Competition

As novel pharmaceutical medications are manufactured, pharmaceutical companies are able to price their product as they see fit. Prices can become exorbitant in cases where there are no other competing medications. As frontrunners in treating an illness, pharmaceutical companies also gain power in controlling the market and the value of products that treat a particular disease. This, in turn, allows them to receive a higher profit margin than if there would be a competitor on the market. What the new healthcare policy will do is that “the Secretary of Health and Human Services will establish an independent review board to assess [the product’s] value. The board will recommend a reasonable price, based on the average price in other countries (a process called external reference pricing) or, if the drug is entering the U.S. market first, based on an evaluation by the independent board members.” 2 The external reference pricing review process will cause the pharmaceutical companies’ pricing of a product in the United States to be comparable to their product pricing in other countries. Several countries have similar review boards, including the U.K., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. In continental Europe, countries can go through the European Medicines Agency to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of medications.7 The introduction of an independent review board would signify that brand-name pharmaceutical companies will not have the same power that they once had in the stock market, as an outside independent agency will control their potential profit. In turn, investors are unlikely to pursue new and large investments in companies with no competition, as they will have to oblige to the government’s new standards. Though the external reference pricing review process will not directly apply to generic pharmaceutical companies, it has been found that when “there is a single generic producer, the average manufacturer price ( AMP)  is 39% lower than the brand AMP before generic competition, compared to a 31% reduction using invoice prices”. 10 With an independent review board pricing brand-name pharmaceutical medication, generic pharmaceuticals are likely to price their generic variations at a lower price point than usual. In turn, though the new administration’s rules support generic pharmaceutical companies,  this particular section of President Joe Biden’s health policy will likely cause generic pharmaceutical companies to lose a significant portion of potential profit.

Allowing Consumers To Buy Prescription Drugs From Other Countries

A final way that the healthcare policy may change investors’ perspective in name-brand pharmaceutical companies is by allowing the public to buy prescription drugs from other countries. As of now, “it is illegal for individuals to import drugs or devices into the U.S. for personal use because these products purchased from other countries often have not been approved by the FDA for use and sale in the U.S.” 5 When this policy goes into effect, the leverage that U.S. based brand-name companies had in controlling the price of prescription medications available to the general public will be significantly reduced unless they lower their prices to be comparable to those companies that are based outside the U.S. This means that what was once a U.S. based market will be infiltrated with new rivals that these U.S. based companies have to fight against to control the brand-name prescription medication market. With them losing a significant portion of the market, investors will presumably move toward the generic pharmaceutical company market. As a result, they have a substantial chance of growing rather than stalling in 2021.


2021 will encourage investors to expand their investments into the generic pharmaceutical market and the managed care sector due to the new healthcare policies that Joe Biden’s presidency will attempt to put into effect immediately. The investments will strengthen generic pharmaceutical companies’ position among investors due to the new investment trend. The new healthcare policies will increase investors’ trust in managed care companies as they transition into a more consolidate patient care system. Accordingly, if healthcare investors aim for a successful 2021, they may want to adjust to these new policies.

Bioinsider is hosting an informal closed-door Friday Roundtable Discussion on Friday, Jan. 29 covering “How COVID-19 is Driving Venture Investments in Healthcare Innovation” from 12:00 – 1:00 PM EST. Sign up and join this discussion here using this FREE promo code “100expert”.

About the author:

Nicole Ludwiak is enthusiastic about emerging cancer therapeutics and the potential of technology to advance medical research. 




  1. S. Legal, Inc. (2020). Managed Care Organization (MCO) Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.U.S. Legal.
  2. Biden For President. (2020, October 12).Plan to Protect and Build on Obamacare | Joe Biden. Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website.
  3. Nathan-Kazis, J. (2021, January 15).Buy Anthem Because It Should Benefit From a Biden Stimulus, Analyst Says. Barron’s.
  4. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. (2018, June 1). Generic Drugs: Questions & Answers. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
  5. The Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples (CREATES) Act of 2019. (, 2019). Senate.Gov.
  6. Office of Regulatory Affairs. (2020, November 10). Personal Importation. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
  7. Evans, W. K., & de Oliveira, C. (2017). Evaluating Cost-Effectiveness: An Essential Part of New Cancer Drug Approvals. Journal of Thoracic Oncology12(10), 1461–1463.
  8. How Have Providers Responded to the Increased Demand for Health Care Under the Affordable Care Act?(2017, November 1). RWJF.
  9. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. (2017, November 14). Drugs@FDA Glossary of Terms. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
  10. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. (2019, December 13). Generic Competition and Drug Prices. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on xing
Share on email

You may also be interested in...

James E. Crowe, Jr., MD,

Director, Vanderbilt Vaccine Center; Professor, Pediatrics and Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Ann Scott Carell Chair; Founder, IDBiologics

Dr. Crowe’s laboratory has a broad portfolio of work in the area of viral immunology and antibody sciences, with the goal to discover mechanisms of immunity important to developing new therapeutics and vaccines.

Dr. Crowe received his MD degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he also completed his pediatrics residency. Following his clinical training, Dr. Crowe received five years of post-doctoral training in the laboratory of Infectious Diseases at the NIH. He completed infectious diseases fellowship training in 1996 at Vanderbilt and has run an independent laboratory at Vanderbilt since that time. He is currently Professor of Pediatrics and of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, and the Ann Scott Carell Chair, Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The laboratory’s work has been published in over 300 publications in high-quality science journals including CellScience and Nature, and leading medical journals including the New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA. Dr. Crowe was elected to the National Academy of Medicine in 2014 and the National Academy of Inventors in 2017. He has been the recipient of investigator awards from the March of Dimes, American Society for Microbiology, Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and Society for Pediatric Research. He was awarded the Judson Infectious Daland Prize of the American Philosophical Society, the Oswald Avery Award of the IDSA, the E. Mead Johnson Award for Excellence in Pediatrics, the Outstanding Investigator Award of the American Federation for Medical Research, the Norman J. Siegel Award of the American Pediatric Society, the Samuel Rosenthal Prize for Excellence in Academic Pediatrics, the Stanley J. Korsmeyer Award of American Society for Clinical Investigation, the Distinguished Medical Alumnus Award from UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC. He is an elected Fellow of AAM, AAAS, ASCI, and AAP, IDSA, APS, and others. His research team was selected as the Best Academic Research Team at the 11th Annual Vaccine Industry Excellence Awards. He was awarded the inaugural 2019 Merck Future Insight Prize, a 1M Euro prize shared with Pardis Sabeti. 

He is the Founder of IDBiologics, Inc., an early-stage biotech company developing human monoclonal antibodies for infectious diseases.

Daniel Chen, MD, PhD

CMO, IGM Bioscience

Daniel S. Chen, MD, PhD, is the Chief Medical Officer for IGM Biosciences, and former Vice President, Global Head of Cancer Immunotherapy Development at Genentech/Roche.  He received a BS degree in Biology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1990), a PhD in Microbiology & Immunology (1996), and MD (1998) from the University of Southern California. His PhD work and publications focused on “Early Events in Coronavirus Infection.”

Daniel completed an Internal Medicine Residency and Medical Oncology Fellowship at Stanford University (2003). He went on to complete a Post-doctoral fellowship with Mark Davis in Immunology, where he was a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Associate. He also ran the metastatic melanoma clinic at the Stanford Cancer Center from 2003-2006. In that time, he studied human anti-cancer immune responses pre- and post-cancer vaccination and cytokine administration to determine why anti-tumor immune responses were not more clinically effective. He received a U19 grant to develop better immunologic tools to interrogate human immune responses and ultimately patented the MHC cellular microarray to detect and functionally characterize antigen-specific T cell states.

He continued as Adjunct Clinical Faculty at Stanford from 2006-2016, where he cared for melanoma patients. At Genentech from 2006-2018, Daniel focused on the clinical development of anti-angiogenic and immune-modulatory targeted therapies in both early and late development, as well as the diagnostic tools to aid their development. This included leading the clinical development for atezolizumab, a PD-L1 inhibitor, from the time the program was in research through IND, Phase I, Phase II, Phase III, to filing and approvals in multiple indications worldwide. At IGM, Daniel focuses on the development of novel engineered multivalent and multispecific therapeutics. He is a reviewer for Nature, Immunity, and Clinical Cancer Research, serves on the Board of Directors for SITC, co-chair of the CRI cancer Immunotherapy consortium, gave the keynote presentation at the AACR NCI EORTC Annual Meeting 2014 and presented at the US Congressional Briefing on Immuno Oncology in 2017. He has continued to publish with academic and industry collaborators in the field of cancer immunotherapy, including the often-referenced Chen and Mellman manuscripts, “Elements of cancer immunity and the cancer-immune set point” and “Oncology meets Immunology: The Cancer-Immunity Cycle.”

Imre Berger

Founding Director, Max Planck Bristol Centre; Chair in Biochemistry and Chemistry; University of Bristol UK

Imre Berger was trained as a biochemist and synthetic biologist at Leibniz University and Medical School (MHH) in Hannover (Germany), at MIT (Cambridge, USA), and at ETH Zurich (Switzerland). Imre’s team develops enabling methods for DNA delivery and genome engineering, engineers synthetic vaccines and nanosensors and researches the structure and mechanism of multiprotein complexes in human health and disease. After Group Leader posts at ETH (2005) and EMBL (2007), Berger joined Bristol as Full Professor of Biochemistry (2014) with a joint appointment in Chemistry (2019). He is Founding Director of the Max Planck Centre for Minimal Biology in Bristol, Director of the BBSRC/EPSRC research center for synthetic biology BrisSynBio and Co-director of the Bristol Biodesign Institute BBI.

Imre Berger holds international patents for DNA and protein technologies, co-founded three biotech companies, and received numerous distinctions, notably the Swiss Technology Award, the W.A. DeVigier Foundation Award, and a Wellcome Trust Senior Investigator Award for his innovative research. Since 2019, he is an Investigator of the European Research Council (ERC).

Prof. Berger has participated in leading roles in numerous European Commission (EC) projects, including the pan-European structural biology infrastructure INSTRUCT. He has been Coordinator of the EC FP7 HEALTH ComplexINC project enhancing production tools for complex biologics in academic and industrial R&D (2011-2016) and is partner in the EPSRC funded Innovative Future Vaccine Manufacturing Research Hub.

Sina Bavari, PhD

CSO, Edge BioInnovation Consulting and Management; former CSO, Scientific Director US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)

Dr. Sina Bavari is the co-founder of Healion Bio. He is one of the lead (non-gov) scientific adviser to the World Health Organization on SARSCoV-2. He has spent over 30 years developing rapid response diagnostics, prophylaxis, therapeutics, and vaccines for some of the world’s deadliest infectious diseases. Prior to co-founding Healion Bio, Dr. Bavari founded Edge BioInnovation Consulting and Mgt. and was the Chief Scientific Officer and Scientific Director at USAMRIID (US Army Research Institute of Infectious Diseases), where he spent over twenty years leading the discovery and development of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics or diseases such as SARS and MERS CoVs, Ebola, Marburg, Zika, Smallpox, Sudan, Nipah, alpha viruses, Anthrax and many others. He has worked extensively with the FDA to successfully develop clinically proven countermeasures for many so-called envelope viruses like SARS-CoV-2. Dr. Bavari has contributed to ~20 drug development candidates such as Remdesivir, 30 patents, and many IND filings. He has trained over 70 scientists and managed over 500 scientists and supporting staff. His work has resulted in over 350 publications in many of the leading scientific journals including Nature, Nature Medicine, Cell, Cell Hosts, New England Journal of Medicine and many others. He has degrees from USC, and the University of Nebraska where he received his PhD in Immunotoxicology and Pharmaceutical Science.

Therapeutics Pipeline for COVID-19

Get the latest updates, interviews and receive special offers

Pre-register Today!

Ralph Rogers, MD

Assistant Professor of Medicine, Clinician Educator, Infectious Diseases, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University

Ralph Rogers, MD is an infectious disease specialist at the Lifespan Cancer Institute. He earned his medical degree from The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University where he also completed his residency and fellowship in infectious diseases. Dr. Rogers is Assistant Professor of Medicine, Clinician Educator Division of Infectious Diseases Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University. He is a member of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) and the American Society of Transplantation (AST).

John Sninsky, PhD

Consultant, Translational Sciences

John J. Sninsky, PhD is a translational medicine consultant with deep understanding of diagnostics and diagnostics paired with medicine intervention. John has served in senior management positions in small and large CLIA service laboratories and in vitro diagnostic kit companies including Cetus, Roche Molecular Systems, Celera, Quest and CareDx. He was a member of the pioneering Cetus team that developed and optimized PCR technology for research and diagnostic use; specifically, the virology team developed the HIV, HTLV, HPV, HCV and HBV PCR assays. John put in place a surveillance initiative for viral variants and presented at the first FDA PMA advisory meeting for HIV PCR approval.

Timothy J. O’Leary, MD, PhD

Adjunct Professor, Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine; Former Chief Research and Development Officer, Veterans Affairs

Timothy O’Leary, MD, is Adjunct Professor of Pathology at the University of Maryland and served as Chief Research and Development Officer (CRADO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs from 2013-2015. He holds a doctorate in physical chemistry from Stanford University and a medical degree from the University of Michigan.

He is certified in anatomic pathology by the American Board of Pathology and in molecular genetic pathology by the American Board of Pathology and the American Board of Medical Genetics. Prior to his VA service, O’Leary chaired the Department of Cellular Pathology and Genetics at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology for more than 15 years. He joined VA in 2004 and served as Director of Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development, Director of Clinical Sciences Research and Development, and Deputy CRADO prior to his appointment as CRADO. O’Leary also served as a reserve member of the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps from 1979 to 2010, serving two tours on active duty. His research interests include genomics, proteomics, and ultrasensitive detection of biological toxins. He has served on numerous federal panels and advisory committees, including the Health and Human Services Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee and the Food and Drug Administration Hematology and Devices Panel. O’Leary, the holder of four patents, has authored or co-authored more than 190 journal articles and numerous book chapters and technical reports. He is a past president of the Association for Molecular Pathology and served as editor-in-chief for the Journal of Molecular Diagnostics.