Gilead Sciences (GILD) is still too often discussed through a shrinking Veklury lens or as a mature HIV cash machine that needs a new growth story. The latest quarter argues for a different reading. Gilead is still anchored by HIV, but the numbers increasingly show a broader bridge between its core antiviral franchise, newer launch activity, and a more credible oncology contribution. That does not make the company a hyper-growth biotech, but it does make the business more durable than a single-product or post-pandemic framing suggests.
Start with the base. In the first quarter of 2026, Gilead reported total revenues of $6.960 billion, up from $6.667 billion a year earlier, while product sales increased to $6.946 billion from $6.613 billion. Net income rose to $2.021 billion from $1.315 billion. Those are not spectacular top-line numbers by biotech-growth standards, but they matter because they came while the company kept absorbing a large decline in Veklury, the COVID therapy that had previously distorted comparisons.
Related Coverage
That is why the HIV franchise remains the center of the thesis. Total HIV product sales rose to $5.030 billion in the quarter from $4.587 billion a year earlier. Biktarvy reached $3.361 billion, up from $3.150 billion, while Descovy increased to $807 million from $586 million. Gilead also posted $166 million in Yeztugo sales, a new contribution absent in the prior-year quarter. The message is straightforward: the core franchise is still growing, and it is giving Gilead the time and financial capacity to build out its next set of revenue drivers.
That bridge matters because Veklury is moving the opposite way. First-quarter Veklury sales fell to $144 million from $302 million a year ago. If investors focus only on that decline, Gilead can look like a company losing one of its recent support pillars. But the product-level table in the 10-Q shows that HIV growth more than absorbed that pressure, and the liver and oncology portfolios also added support. In other words, the business is not depending on pandemic-era revenue to defend the income statement anymore.
The liver portfolio is not the central thesis, but it helps show the shape of the transition. Total liver-disease sales were $767 million in the quarter, roughly flat with $758 million a year earlier, yet the mix improved. Livdelzi rose to $133 million from $40 million, showing that newer products can add to the portfolio even when older hepatitis lines are mature or under pressure. Flat category totals are less concerning when the underlying composition is getting healthier.
Oncology still is not big enough to carry Gilead by itself, but it is now large enough to matter strategically. Total oncology sales reached $810 million in the quarter, up from $757 million a year earlier. Trodelvy increased to $402 million from $293 million, which is the cleanest sign that the oncology portfolio is gaining more real commercial weight. Cell therapy remained mixed, with Yescarta at $332 million versus $386 million a year ago and Tecartus at $75 million versus $78 million, but the broader takeaway is that Gilead now has multiple oncology revenue streams rather than a purely aspirational pipeline narrative.
That is important for how investors should think about the stock. A company with $5.030 billion in quarterly HIV sales, $810 million in quarterly oncology revenue, and a newer liver launch scaling from a small base is not just defending a legacy antiviral franchise. It is using that franchise to fund a measured business expansion. The quarter suggests the platform is sturdier than a “Veklury fades, then what?” debate implies.
Balance-sheet strength gives management room to keep working that plan. Gilead ended March with $7.628 billion in cash and cash equivalents and total assets of $56.278 billion. That does not guarantee smart capital allocation, but it does reduce pressure to force short-term commercial wins or overreach financially. The company has enough scale and liquidity to keep investing across HIV, oncology, and liver disease while still protecting profitability.
The risk is that the bridge could take longer to mature than investors want. Oncology growth is real, but it is not yet large enough to redefine the company, and some cell-therapy lines remain uneven. If HIV growth slows before newer categories become more meaningful, the multiple could stay stuck. But the latest quarter makes it harder to argue that Gilead is merely harvesting old assets.
A better way to frame GILD today is as a cash-rich biopharma company whose HIV base is still expanding, whose oncology business is becoming more tangible, and whose newer launches are filling in the middle. That does not make the story dramatic. It makes it investable.
Key Signals for Investors
HIV sales of $5.030 billion, including Biktarvy at $3.361 billion, remain the core proof that Gilead’s main earnings engine is still growing rather than simply being harvested.
Trodelvy’s rise to $402 million is one of the clearest markers of whether oncology can become a more meaningful second leg of the story.
Veklury’s decline to $144 million should keep fading as a headline issue if the company can continue offsetting it with HIV strength and newer product launches.
Sources
Gilead Sciences Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for quarter ended March 31, 2026: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/882095/000088209526000024/gild-20260331.htm
