Bristol-Myers Squibb Reports Higher Revenue, Net Income, and Diluted EPS on Both Reporting Windows in Latest Interim Filing

Bottom line

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company's interim filing shows a profit on both reporting windows, and on every headline line the authorized direction between the current period and its prior-year comparative is higher. On the three-month reporting period, Revenues, Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent, and Earnings Per Share, Diluted are all higher than the prior-year comparative, and the diluted EPS reading moved from a profit in the prior-year comparative to a profit in the current quarter. On the six-month year-to-date window, Revenues, Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent, and Earnings Per Share, Diluted are again higher than the prior-year comparative, and diluted EPS moved from a prior profit to a current profit as well.

Across the income statement itself, however, the filing does not state why any of these figures moved The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.. The filing evidence is drawn from a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal period period-ended-2026-06-30 filed under accession 0000014272-26-000020 by the company identified as BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB CO with CIK 0000014272 and ticker BMY. BMS describes itself as operating in a single segment engaged in the discovery, development, licensing, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of innovative medicines, and notes that the Chief Executive Officer, as the chief operating decision maker, uses consolidated net income or loss when managing and allocating resources at the corporate level.

The filing flags that interim results and trends may not be indicative of full-year operating results, that certain footnotes and other information normally required for annual financial statements have been condensed or omitted, and that certain amounts may not sum due to rounding. Because the segment discussion treats consolidated net income or loss as the headline performance measure, the reported swing in net income and diluted earnings per share is the change most directly tied to how BMS presents its own performance, while the higher revenues are best read alongside that profit result rather than in isolation.

None. the filing contains no contemporaneous management narrative that contradicts the direction shown by the authorized comparisons, and no specific offsetting cost or one-time item is broken out in the quoted material. , and it does not include any peer or industry comparison The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison..

Readers who want a cross-company read on a similar profit-to-profit interim pattern can compare against Lizely Finance Earnings Analysis — ANI Pharmaceuticals Interim Filing: Profit-to-Profit Growth on Both Windows.

Financial performance

- Reported figures for the three-month and six-month year-to-date periods frame the year's reported results against the prior-year comparatives. - Revenues were $12,973,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2026 and $12,269,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2025. - Revenues were $24,462,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and $23,470,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent was $3,317,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2026 and $1,310,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2025. - Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent was $5,994,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and $3,766,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Earnings Per Share, Diluted was $1.62 per diluted share USD/SHARES for the three months ended June 30, 2026 and $0.64 per diluted share USD/SHARES for the three months ended June 30, 2025. - Earnings Per Share, Diluted was $2.93 per diluted share USD/SHARES for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and $1.85 per diluted share USD/SHARES for the six months ended June 30, 2025.

- The authorized directional comparisons for the filing indicate that revenues were higher on both the quarter and six-month year-to-date views than in the prior-year periods. Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent and Earnings Per Share, Diluted were higher than the prior-year results on both the quarter and six-month year-to-date views, with the period results remaining profit rather than a loss in each case.

- The cited note describing the earnings per share computation is Note 8, and the cited note addressing the income tax position affecting reported net income is Note 7. The cited note covering the segment-level expense categories regularly reviewed by the CEO is Note 2.

- The accounting context disclosed in the filing notes that revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities can vary during each quarter of the year, and that results and trends in these unaudited consolidated financial statements may not be indicative of full year operating results. The most significant assumptions involve estimates used in determining accounting for acquisitions, including asset valuations; impairments of long-lived assets; charge-backs, cash discounts, sales rebates, returns and other adjustments; legal contingencies; and income taxes.

- The determination of a single segment is consistent with the financial information regularly reviewed by the CEO for purposes of evaluating performance, allocating resources, setting incentive compensation targets, and planning and forecasting future periods.

- Recently adopted accounting standards discussed in the filing include amended FASB guidance on derivatives, hedging, and revenue from contracts with customers, which the filing notes did not have an impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements for prior transactions, with subsequent-period impact dependent upon future business development activities.

- Recently issued accounting standards not yet adopted include amended guidance on internal-use software and a new income statement expense disaggregation disclosure standard, both effective for annual periods beginning after December of a subsequent year. The filing notes that the new disaggregation guidance will result in incremental footnote disclosures and that the Company is currently updating its financial reporting processes and systems to support the new disclosure requirements.

- Other revenues include royalties and alliance-related revenues for products not sold by the Company's regional commercial organizations, including royalties received from Merck on Winrevair. Revenue recognized from performance obligations satisfied in prior periods consists primarily of royalties for out-licensing arrangements and revised estimates for GTN adjustments related to prior period sales, and is presented by quarter and six-month year-to-date periods. The Company enters into collaboration arrangements with third parties for the development and commercialization of certain products, with both parties active participants exposed to significant risks and rewards depending on the commercial success of the activities. A global strategic collaboration with BioNTech was entered into for the co-development and co-commercialization of pumitamig, a bispecific antibody targeting (omitted) and VEGF-A, currently being evaluated in several indications, including in CRC, ES-SCLC, NSCLC and TNBC.

- The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.

- The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison.

Operating drivers and segments

BMS operates as a single reportable segment, and that structural choice is the dominant piece of segment evidence in this filing. The cited note states that the company is "engaged in the discovery, development, licensing, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of innovative medicines that help patients prevail over serious diseases," and that the determination of a single segment "is consistent with the financial information regularly reviewed by the CEO." Because there is no product-, therapeutic-area-, or geography-level disaggregation, there is no segment-level margin table to read; margin commentary has to be inferred from consolidated revenue and consolidated earnings lines rather than from divisional disclosures.

On the consolidated top line, revenue is reported at $12,973,000,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2026 and at $24,462,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2026, both of which are higher than their respective prior-year figures $12,269,000,000 and $23,470,000,000. The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. Operating-leverage claims about "how much" of that revenue gain reached the bottom line are not directly visible, since interim expense disaggregation under the recently adopted FASB income-statement disclosure guidance is referenced in the cited note rather than populated with full detail in this excerpt.

Management ties its segment determination to the way the CEO actually runs the business, stating that "the Chief Executive Officer ('CEO'), as the chief operating decision maker, uses consolidated net income or loss as reported on the income statement when managing and allocating resources at the corporate level." That framing converts the single-segment designation into a stated organizational fact rather than a presentation choice: research and development and the supply chain are described as global functions, and resource allocation is positioned at the corporate level rather than by product or franchise. Management also flags that expense categorization in the cited note includes "(b) costs to support clinical development of potential new products, including expansion of indications for existing products through Phase I, Phase II and Phase III clinical studies" and "(c) costs to support manufacturing development of pre-approved products, medical support of marketed products, IPRD impairment charges, costs to acquire a priority review voucher and proportionate allocations of enterprise-wide costs."

The second management claim is accounting-policy and forward-looking: the cited note describes "the FASB issued guidance on income statement disclosures" intended to "provide enhanced disclosures of income statement expenses to improve transparency," and notes the effective dates cover "annual periods beginning after December" dates and "interim periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December" dates. Management frames this as future disclosure expansion rather than a current-period restructuring of the income statement.

Independent analysis of those claims starts from a gap: even with higher revenue on both windows, the filing does not break out how much of the lift came from in-line product growth versus acquisitions, licensing arrangements, or alliance economics, because BMS reports as a single segment. The cited note confirms that "the determination of a single segment is consistent with the financial information regularly reviewed by the CEO," which means external readers cannot independently verify whether the year-over-year revenue gain at $12,973,000,000 versus $12,269,000,000 and at $24,462,000,000 versus $23,470,000,000 is broad-based or concentrated in any single therapeutic area. The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.

On management's accounting-policy claim, the cited note shows BMS is preparing for enhanced expense disaggregation under the new FASB income-statement standard, but the current filing is still presented under existing presentation rules; future quarters are where richer expense visibility will arrive. For broader reading on interim revenue swings of comparable shape, the Lizely Finance Earnings Analysis — ANI Pharmaceuticals Interim Filing: Profit-to-Profit Growth on Both Windows provides a parallel pattern of higher revenue on both windows without segment split. Until BMS adopts the enhanced expense disclosures, any independent attribution of margin movement between functions or therapeutic areas remains unsupported, and The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. continues to apply to the gap between consolidated revenue direction and the absence of operating-driver detail.

Cash flow and capital

- Reported facts (balance sheet at the period end): - Cash and Cash Equivalents, at Carrying Value stood at $8,722,000,000 USD as of the balance sheet date of June 30, 2026. - Accounts and Other Receivables, Net, Current were reported at $1,475,000,000 USD as of the balance sheet date of June 30, 2026. - Accounts Payable, Current were reported at $4,158,000,000 USD as of the balance sheet date of June 30, 2026.

- Long-term Debt, Excluding Current Maturities was carried at $42,093,000,000 USD as of the balance sheet date of June 30, 2026. - Reported facts (six-month year-to-date cash flow lines): - Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities was $4,497,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026, versus $5,871,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities was -$1,745,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026, versus -$972,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025.

- Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities was -$4,190,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026, versus -$2,829,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Payments to Acquire Property, Plant, and Equipment were $652,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026, versus $621,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Payments of Dividends were $2,570,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026, versus $2,520,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025.

S. rights to Abecma and entered into new collaborations — including the BioNTech pumitamig co-development/co-commercialization agreement and the Hengrui global strategic collaboration covering oncology, hematology and immunology assets — alongside a Priority Review Voucher purchase that was expensed to Research and development, a Mirati contingent value rights fair-value adjustment, and the ongoing Reblozyl and Winrevair* licensing arrangements with Merck. - Analyst inference: Operating cash flow continues to be positive on a year-to-date basis, financing outflows remain negative, and investing outflows remain negative, which together are consistent with a mature pharma profile that funds licensing/collaboration activity and capital returns from internally generated cash rather than from new debt issuance, The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause..

- Counter-evidence: None of the catalogued dimensions in this section contradict each other; the period-over-period comparison for Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities is authorized only as a "decrease" direction, and the cited note shows no offsetting disclosure that would reverse that characterization. - Unknowns: The filing evidence does not disclose segment-level detail for working-capital movements, free cash flow, or any peer or industry comparison, so The filing evidence does not disclose segment-level detail for this dimension.

and The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. apply to anything beyond the consolidated lines reported above.

Peer and historical context

- For BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB CO under 10-Q for period-ended-2026-06-30, the only historical yardstick available inside this filing is the company's own prior-year comparatives — there is no external peer or industry benchmark supplied alongside the numbers. - The pattern that emerges from the authorized comparisons is internally consistent: top-line, bottom-line and operating cash all moved in a similar direction year over year on the year-to-date window, while the quarter-only views tell the same directional story on a shorter horizon.

- The quarter-only operating cash comparison is not on the authorized list for this section, so any directional read on quarterly cash generation would be unsupported; this is a real limit on what can be inferred from the filing alone. - The directional read on operating cash flow on the year-to-date window is the opposite sign from revenue and net income, which is a meaningful internal inconsistency the filing does not reconcile for the reader.

Against the prior-year comparative, $24,462,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2026 came in higher than $23,470,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, and $12,973,000,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2026 likewise exceeded $12,269,000,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2025. On profitability, $5,994,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2026 was higher than $3,766,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, and the same profit-to-profit, higher-than-prior comparison holds for the quarter: $3,317,000,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2026 versus $1,310,000,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Diluted earnings per share tracked the same authorized direction on both windows, profit in both periods and higher than the prior period.

The one counter-direction in the authorized set is cash generation. $4,497,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2026 was lower than $5,871,000,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, even though both periods stayed in positive territory — a top-line and earnings improvement accompanied by softer operating cash conversion on the year-to-date view. The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. The financing and investing cash-flow lines in the authorized list also moved opposite to the income statement, but again the filing does not narrate a single driver.

On the structural side, the notes cited — including the restructuring discussion in the source narrative — point to ongoing portfolio reshaping (alliances, licensing, divestiture gains and contingent-value-rights fair-value changes) that overlaps the same prior-year window the comparatives measure against. That is consistent with a company whose reported figures are influenced by non-recurring items, which is worth holding in mind when reading a one-line "higher revenue, higher net income, lower operating cash" pattern.

Finally, peer context is absent from the filing evidence itself: there is no comparable company table, no industry index and no consensus number in the filing the reader can place BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB COBMY] alongside. Readers who want an external cross-check have to leave this document. A useful adjacent read in the Lizely archive is AES Corp interim filing shows higher revenue and a loss-to-profit swing on net income and diluted EPS for both the quarter and the six-month year-to-date period, while capital and dividend outflows also stepped up., which illustrates how another interim filer presented a profit-side improvement paired with stepped-up capital and dividend outflows — a structurally similar tension to the one seen here on the cash line. The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison.

Scenario analysis

- Both reported windows show a profit-to-profit transition with the authorized increase direction, leaving the base case anchored on continued profitability rather than recovery from a loss. - Top-line results for the reporting period are higher than the prior-year comparative on both the three-month and six-month year-to-date views (see Revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2026 vs the three months ended June 30, 2025 and for the six months ended June 30, 2026 vs the six months ended June 30, 2025). - Bottom-line results track in the same direction, higher than the prior-year comparative on both windows (see Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent for the three months ended June 30, 2026 vs the three months ended June 30, 2025 and for the six months ended June 30, 2026 vs the six months ended June 30, 2025). - The BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB CO interim filing, filed as 10-Q for period-ended-2026-06-30 under accession 0000014272-26-000020, frames a path in which the existing portfolio and alliance economics (such as the Merck Reblozyl and Winrevair arrangements and the Hengrui collaboration discussed in the cited note) continue to support revenue flow without requiring a step-change in operating model assumptions.

- A constructive read would layer continued Revenues growth on top of higher Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent for both windows cited above, with the prior-period figures ($12,269,000,000 and $1,310,000,000 for the quarter, and $23,470,000,000 and $3,766,000,000 for the year-to-date) representing the comparative floor. - Upside conditions also assume that the restructuring and integration initiatives referenced in Note 9 and the broader restructuring context deliver the cost synergies management describes, without introducing offsetting charges that would weigh on net income. - Within Other (Income)/Expense and Income Taxes (Note 5 and Note 7), an upside read presumes that the effective tax rate drivers noted by management, including jurisdictional mix and amortization of acquired intangible assets, behave in line with the trend described rather than reversing.

- A cautious read still accepts higher year-over-year Revenues and higher year-over-year Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent on both windows (the three months ended June 30, 2026 vs the three months ended June 30, 2025 and the six months ended June 30, 2026 vs the six months ended June 30, 2025), but warns that magnitude could narrow from the reported base if any of the noted items shift adversely. - The BioNTech collaboration tax impact, open IRS appeals on transfer pricing and tax credits described in Note 7, and the remaining restructuring charges flagged in Note 9 are candidate swing factors that the filing itself flags as having potential material impact. - The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. - The filing evidence does not disclose segment-level detail for this dimension.

The contrast across the three scenarios sits in the gap between reported figures rather than in their direction, since every reported comparison in this filing points the same way on both windows. Readers comparing this profile with peers can cross-check direction with SMITH A O CORP (AOS) Reports Softer Revenue, Operating Income, Net Income, and Diluted EPS on Both the Quarter and Six-Month Year-to-Date Views in Form (Accession before treating the upside path as consensus.

Risks and what to watch

** Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent was $5,994,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and $3,317,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2026, with prior-period comparatives of $3,766,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and $1,310,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Revenues were $24,462,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and $12,973,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2026, against $23,470,000,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and $12,269,000,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2025.

Both top-line and bottom-line readings were in the dual direction of being higher than the prior period on the year-to-date window and the three-month window, with the net income transition recorded as profit to profit on both windows. ** The user-facing narrative in the cited notes characterises the period as one of active restructuring: pipeline reorganisation, commercial-model change, and a manufacturing network redesign, alongside restructuring and integration plans tied to acquisitions that retain residual charges.

The same source flags income-tax risk as a material forward-looking item, noting open IRS examinations for the covered tax years, an ongoing administrative appeals process, and the possibility of materially adverse adjustments from the IRS and other tax authorities. The same tax-rate discussion also signals that the effective rate can move as the jurisdictional earnings mix and tax reserves are revised, which is a discrete forward risk to net income that the headline profitability reading does not show. ** Because the period strings authorised for this section only confirm direction and not magnitude, any widening or narrowing of the revenue or net-income gap, the precise saving-versus-charge spotlight, and the currency of the tax exposure are read from the underlying filings rather than inferred here.

The narrative does not break out, by line, how much of the change came from price, volume, currency, or one-time items, so the headline growth should be read alongside the inventory-charge and restructuring-charge notes in subsequent periods. ** The filing evidence does not disclose segment-level detail for the period-over-period change in revenue or net income, does not present a peer or industry comparison, and The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison.. The same source does not attribute the change to any single cause, so The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.

for the direction-of-change read. The timing of the resolution of the IRS notices of proposed adjustments is described as uncertain, and the magnitude of the open-tax exposure is not quantified for readers. ** Priority items for the next the six months ended June 30, 2026 and the three months ended June 30, 2026 filings are: the reconciliation of restructuring and integration charges versus cost-synergy realisation, the evolution of the effective tax rate given the ongoing IRS appeals, the split between cash taxes and deferred tax impacts, and any new impairment or accelerated depreciation tied to the site-exit programme.

Investors should also track the cash-flow lines that this section's authorised comparisons highlight — net cash from operating, investing, and financing activities, payments of dividends, and payments to acquire property, plant, and equipment — to see whether the higher reported earnings and changed charge base translate into a different cash profile. For a separate cross-check on how a softer revenue and net-income read can read across an interim filing, see SMITH A O CORP (AOS) Reports Softer Revenue, Operating Income, Net Income, and Diluted EPS on Both the Quarter and Six-Month Year-to-Date Views in Form.