Nearly 80% of professionals in the biopharmaceutical industry attend JPM almost every year, only with different identities and objectives each time. One of JPM’s greatest allures is that the roles of its participants are constantly being reexamined on this stage.

“This year, BD tasks took a backseat to fundraising for most attendees.” In January, Bao Jun attended JPM with his newly founded firm in an entirely new capacity. With no pressing BD mandates, his primary goal was to connect with investors for his newly launched fund: “Just to get acquainted with everyone, to make my presence known.”

This shift in identity has given him a keener and more detached perspective on industry trends.

At this year’s JPM, an unprecedented optimism toward China’s innovative drugs permeated the event, with China’s innovation emerging as a new focal point of expectation. Bao Jun felt this “continuing China frenzy” in an intensely real and profound way on the ground.

“China was an unavoidable topic in every conversation—not just among Chinese attendees, but in foreign circles too, including with Pharma CEOs and partners at top-tier funds.” Bao Jun noted that optimism had become the prevailing sentiment; even those with concerns were only worried about “the impact on certain U.S. companies.”

A highly symbolic trend emerged: some early-stage U.S. biotechs have adopted a “defensive strategy”—avoiding early disclosure of their target molecules.

“Because once a target is announced, there will likely be 10 Chinese companies jumping on it immediately,” Bao Jun admitted. “This perfectly illustrates the competitive trait of Chinese firms: fast follow. If you have a target, we’ll have it right away, and we’ll even release our clinical data faster than you.”

Beyond speed, a more profound shift lies in the establishment of trust. “Recognition of Chinese clinical data has risen significantly. No matter how fast or cost-effective a drug is, it won’t be favored if its quality is in question.” Bao Jun observed that doubts over the “reliability of Chinese data”—a longstanding hurdle for China’s innovative drugs going global—were barely mentioned at this year’s conference.

Actions have served as the most direct proof. “Virtually every company, big or small, is building a presence in China,” Bao Jun revealed. A major multinational pharma has even revamped the working model of its BD team: heads of each therapeutic area will rotate through China to ensure continuous scouting and coverage of Chinese innovative assets.

Investment firms have moved equally fast. For example, RA Capital, a leading player, had its partners make six trips to China last year. “Next week this month, the firm’s chief investment officer will lead a 30-person delegation to China personally.”

Aside from the enduring China frenzy, another key basis for Bao Jun’s “watershed” judgment is this: the industry is returning to its science-driven fundamentals.

He reflected on the industry’s feverish period from 2020 to 2022: “Back then, any stock with a catchy concept could soar, and even companies with no clinical data whatsoever could complete an IPO. In hindsight, that boom and prosperity were built on irrational expectations.”

Today, the rules of the game have changed completely. “In Hong Kong, a biotech company has little chance of an IPO if it lacks a clear prospect of striking a BD deal with a Pharma giant.”

In his view, the industry has returned to the science-driven fundamentals of product development. Value no longer hinges on the halo of star founders or the hype around trendy technology platforms, but on step-by-step clinical data validation and the success of late-stage (Phase III) clinical trials for biotech products—including many that are being advanced independently without partnerships with Pharma firms.

Bao Jun offered a calm and pragmatic assessment of the 2026 BD market: “The transaction volume may stay flat or decline, but the total value will absolutely not surpass the 2025 peak.”

In 2025, the total value of China’s innovative drug license-out deals exceeded $135.6 billion, with a significant share contributed by a small number of mega-deals such as that of 3SBio. “I don’t think deals of such a large scale will happen frequently again,” Bao Jun stated plainly. “The entire industry must adjust its expectations—it will be extremely difficult to surpass 2025’s peak in 2026.”

His observations have reinforced the logic of a buyer’s market in the sector. He repeatedly cited a well-known industry adage: “Deals are bought, not sold.” “A transaction happens because buyers are seeking you out, not because you are looking to sell. If your assets are high-quality enough, premium buyers will come to you naturally.”

The trend of asset forward-shifting already emerged in 2025, with numerous transactions involving preclinical programs taking place.

In Bao Jun’s view, this trend will continue. On one hand, multinational pharmaceutical companies (MNCs) are highly proactive in sourcing assets and willing to look at earlier-stage programs. On the other hand, Chinese biotechs still face tangible financial pressures: “While the financing environment has improved marginally, there have been no fundamental changes. Severe capital constraints will inevitably push them to pursue BD at an earlier stage of development.”

Furthermore, Bao Jun predicted that as leading international investment funds increase their deeper exposure to China’s innovative drug sector, 2026 may witness the emergence of a new trend of IPOs on U.S. capital markets. “This phenomenon has not appeared yet, but it will gradually come to light.”

Based on these trends, Bao Jun advised biotechs to adjust their mindset and move forward in a pragmatic manner: “Abandon unrealistic and overly high expectations. Treat BD as a strategic tool for corporate development, and push forward decisively when the time is right.”

For companies with multiple pipelines, he recommended prioritizing the completion of their first BD deal. “This not only brings in capital, but more importantly, delivers crucial value validation and credibility endorsement.” At the same time, he specifically reminded enterprises to focus on designing flexible transaction structures: “People usually only think of license-outs, but there are many other transaction structures available that can unlock more possibilities for your company’s future development, value realization and growth potential.”

When it comes to the priority of the three BD models attracting market attention—License, NewCo, and M&A—Bao Jun gave a clear ranking: “M&A is undoubtedly the top priority. If a buyer is looking to acquire your company, you should agree without hesitation, no second thoughts.”

As for the NewCo model, he described it as “always the second choice.” “A NewCo structure delivers limited value to the company, and it should never be the first option for core assets.”

Bao Jun explained that NewCo is essentially a variant of a license agreement, but it often carries lower value: “Because a portion of the upfront payment is made in the buyer’s equity, you do not receive actual cash, and the realization cycle and value of that equity are fraught with uncertainty.”

Regarding transaction pricing, Bao Jun noted that based on BD deals in both Chinese and U.S. markets over the past two years, pricing has generally entered a rational range, and the industry has formed a basic consensus on the value of assets at different development stages. This pricing level is not only aligned with the actual circumstances of Chinese biotechs but also basically on par with the upfront payment levels for assets at similar stages in the U.S.

He pointed out three core factors in pricing: market potential, data maturity, and the most critical one—“the stage at which a pharma company can directly advance development after in-licensing the asset.” “There is a world of difference in asset value between a scenario where a pharma company needs to spend one or two years preparing to initiate Phase III clinical trials after acquisition, and one where it can launch Phase III trials in the U.S. immediately upon in-licensing,” Bao Jun emphasized.

"2026 is also a watershed in my personal career, putting a semicolon to my more than 20 years in BD and as a Biotech executive," said Bao Jun.

Based on his profound observations and judgments of the aforementioned industry trends, after officially retiring from Ambrx Biopharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Bao Jun co-founded Apuri BioVenture with two former schoolmates from the Shanghai Institute of Cell Biology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (now the Institute of Cell Biology and Biochemistry). The company’s mission is focused and pure: to invest in China’s original innovation, and only back technologies and products with the "Me Only" attribute.

What they are targeting is a long-standing gap in China’s innovation ecosystem: how to systematically transform and forge the world-class scientific discoveries continuously generated by the academic community into Biotechs that can compete on the global stage and attract global buyers.

In Bao Jun’s view, China’s biopharmaceutical ecosystem is facing a profound "supply-side reform". "Science is only the starting point, not the end," he explained. "Chinese startups need sophisticated product strategies and global intellectual property layout—an aspect that a university is usually unable to deliver systematically, and that traditional venture capital firms find hard to engage in deeply at the portfolio level."

This is precisely the gap Apuri aims to fill. Positioning itself as a "co-founder of companies" rather than a mere investor or incubator, this early-stage venture capital firm has a core model that completely decouples the roles of scientific founders and industrial operators.

When scientists hold relatively mature intellectual property (with patents just filed or about to be filed), Apuri steps in as a "business co-founder", taking charge of intellectual property sorting, company establishment, early-stage capital injection, and all business operations leading up to Series A financing.

"We are essentially a link between scientists and investors," Bao Jun defined his firm’s position this way.

Scientists typically serve as Chief Scientific Officers (CSOs) or merely as scientific advisors, free from daily management duties and able to remain focused on research. A professional team with extensive industrial and commercial experience—including Bao Jun himself, who acts as interim CEO—oversees the company’s overall operations, financing, and global BD strategy.

The company’s project selection criteria are both subjective and objective: it only focuses on world-leading original innovations with "Me Only" or "First-in-class" attributes, and the scientists must be willing to accept this entrepreneur model led by industrial professionals. Interestingly, none of the several confirmed projects so far fall into the crowded oncology track.

Standing at a new starting point in his career, Bao Jun hopes Apuri will become the "Gateway to Globalizing China's Innovation". Over the next 1-2 years, his top priority is to successfully guide the first batch of projects to complete Series A financing, validating the feasibility of this unique model in China.

As the tides recede in San Francisco and the fervor of JPM fades into calm, what truly endures is a reshaping of industry consensus. The "watershed" defined by Bao Jun is not merely a turning point for China’s innovative drugs—from being chosen to being embraced—but the dawn of a profound restructuring of the global pharmaceutical value chain.

His own pivot—from a "key player" in BD transactions to a "co-builder" of original innovation—epitomizes the evolution of China’s biopharmaceutical industry: from a trend-chasing follower, to a value-defining participant, and ultimately, toward a trailblazing pioneer of original creation.

​​​​​​​

Beyond this watershed lies a new reality: one that is more rational, more exacting, and yet brimming with greater possibilities.